+ All Categories
Home > Documents > PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE

PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE

Date post: 05-Jan-2017
Category:
Upload: ngokhue
View: 212 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
4
105 PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE NOTES ON CURRENT TOPICS IN the House of Lords on Wednesday, June 28th, the Commons amendments to the Pharmacy and Poisons Bill were agreed to. The Unemployment Insurance (Expiring Enact- ments) Bill and the Samaritan Free Hospital for Women Bill were read the third time and passed. The Royal Assent was given to a number of Acts, including the Finance Act, the Pharmacy and Poisons Act, and the Unemployment Insurance (Expiring Enactments) Act. On Thursday, June 29th, in the House of Lords, Lord JESSEL withdrew the University Spurious Degrees (Prohibition of Use and Issue) Bill. He explained that his reason for withdrawing the measure was that considerable objection had been taken to it on account of faulty drafting. Leave was granted to withdraw the Bill, and a new Bill on similar lines was introduced and read a first time. Local Government Officers’ Superannuation On Wednesday, June 28th, the House went into Committee on the Local Government and Other Officers’ Superannuation (Temporary Provisions) Bill. Sir D. HERBERT (Chairman of Committees) was in the chair. On Clause 1 (Certain reductions in remuneration to be disregarded for purposes of superannuation), Sir HENRY JACKSON moved an amendment to leave out " April 1932 " and insert " October 1933." He said he thought it would be inequitable that officers whose remuneration was reduced for the first time on account of national economic conditions subsequent to April 1st, 1932, should be excluded from the provisions of this Bill. The Bill ought to cover cases in which reductions occurred for the first time since Oct. 1st, 1933. Mr. SHAKESPEARE (Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health) said he could not accept the amendment. The object of this Bill was to make legal understandings entered into between local authorities and their employees, which were in fact illegal, but which at the time were made in good faith. They had chosen the period between Sept. 1st, 1931, and April 1st, 1932, because by that time the various associations had been informed by the Ministry that if any further agreements were made they were ultra vires, and that therefore local authori- ties who made such agreements after that date did so in the knowledge that they were breaking the law. Mr. GREENWOOD said that this bombshell fell on local authorities towards the end of August, 1931. A large number of officers and servants agreed to a reduction of their salaries on condition that arrange- ments were made to deal with the.problem of super- annuation. If it was admitted that there was a case for Parliamentary intervention where local authorities acting in good faith had broken the law, it seemed to him that six months was too short a period. He hoped the Government were prepared to be reasonable on this matter, and allow a year for the completion of negotiations which were started as a result of the Government’s policy. Mr. ISAAC FOOT said he was sure it was the desire of the Government in carrying through this Bill to leave no rough edges. Mr. M. BEAUMONT said that any local authority which embarked on these arrangements after the date proposed by the Government knew very well that they were doing an illegal action, and they ought not to be safeguarded. The amendment was negatived. Mr. GREENWOOD moved to insert after the word " understanding " in the clause the words " with the parties concerned." He said that he had an amend- ment later on to make it clear that officers or servants to whom the Asylums Officers’ Superannuation Act, 1909, applied should be brought within the Bill. He understood that the Ministry of Health were prepared to consider the inclusion of these officers in the Bill, but there was some doubt as to whether an under- standing arrived at between the Mental Hospitals’ Association and those employed at mental hospitals was a bona-fide understanding within the terms of the Bill. Medical officers and nurses at mental hospitals were prepared to accept a reduction of salary when the Government came into office, but they naturally desired to protect their superannuation rights, and what he regarded as an understanding was reached. The employing authority, and those who served the employing authority, had asked to discuss the question with the Minister of Health, but that he had refused. If the spirit of this Bill was to operate the Government ought to include within its scope people in the mental hospitals’ service. He hoped that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health would give an assurance that the understanding, as he regarded it, reached between the mental hospitals’ authorities and their employees would be regarded as an understanding within the terms of this Bill. Mr. SHAKESPEARE said he thought he could assure the right hon. gentleman that the asylum officers would be treated in exactly the same way as anybody else. They would be included in this Bill if in fact an understanding was made in good . faith. He presumed that an understanding would have been reached between the visiting committees and their officers, and if that understanding was made in good faith the officers would come within this Bill. The right hon. gentleman’s amendment would make it far more difficult for them to come in. Replying to further questions by Mr. GREENWOOD, Mr. SHAKESPEARE said that every fact would be taken into consideration. If agreements had been reached between national bodies that, of course, would be evidence that there was an understanding ; but local agreements where they existed would be considered too in deciding whether individual persons came under the Bill. Mr. GREENWOOD said that Mr. Shakespeare had pushed the responsibility back on to the individual visiting committees. His (Mr. Greenwood’s) original case was that the Mental Hospitals Association, which represented the majority of mental hospital authorities in this country and certain national bodies, including the British Medical Association, did arrive at an understanding. Now they were told by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health that it would be a matter for each visiting committee and he wanted to know whether an agreement was an agreement when it was national, or only when it was local. The answer that it might be both did not help very much. If Mr. Shakespeare would look into this matter before the Report stage of the Bill he would not press the point any further at that stage. The amendment was withdrawn. Captain ELLISTON moved an amendment the terms of which he said would enable local authorities to reconsider their position in regard to the Bill, and if it was right and proper adjust the superannuation cut in the case of those officers whose pensions they wished to secure. He had heard something of the circumstances in which the Association of Mental Hospital Workers were placed. On the publication of the original memorandum of the Ministry of Health, No. 1122, in September, 1931, that Association met to see whether they could suggest any reduction, and consulted the British Medical Association and the Royal Medico-Psychological Association, and other bodies interested, and submitted a scale of reductions which was welcomed by the visiting committees. The Ministry of Health pointed out that subject to the amendment of the Asylum Workers’ Superannua- tion Act the pensions must be based on the actual salary paid. The Association passed on that warning
Transcript
Page 1: PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE

105

PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE

NOTES ON CURRENT TOPICS

IN the House of Lords on Wednesday, June 28th,the Commons amendments to the Pharmacy andPoisons Bill were agreed to.

. The Unemployment Insurance (Expiring Enact-ments) Bill and the Samaritan Free Hospital forWomen Bill were read the third time and passed.The Royal Assent was given to a number of Acts,

including the Finance Act, the Pharmacy and PoisonsAct, and the Unemployment Insurance (ExpiringEnactments) Act.On Thursday, June 29th, in the House of Lords,

Lord JESSEL withdrew the University Spurious Degrees(Prohibition of Use and Issue) Bill. He explainedthat his reason for withdrawing the measure wasthat considerable objection had been taken to iton account of faulty drafting. Leave was granted towithdraw the Bill, and a new Bill on similar lineswas introduced and read a first time.

Local Government Officers’ SuperannuationOn Wednesday, June 28th, the House went into

Committee on the Local Government and OtherOfficers’ Superannuation (Temporary Provisions) Bill.Sir D. HERBERT (Chairman of Committees) was in thechair.On Clause 1 (Certain reductions in remuneration

to be disregarded for purposes of superannuation),Sir HENRY JACKSON moved an amendment to

leave out " April 1932 " and insert " October 1933."He said he thought it would be inequitable thatofficers whose remuneration was reduced for the firsttime on account of national economic conditionssubsequent to April 1st, 1932, should be excludedfrom the provisions of this Bill. The Bill ought tocover cases in which reductions occurred for the firsttime since Oct. 1st, 1933.

Mr. SHAKESPEARE (Parliamentary Secretary to theMinistry of Health) said he could not accept theamendment. The object of this Bill was to makelegal understandings entered into between localauthorities and their employees, which were in factillegal, but which at the time were made in goodfaith. They had chosen the period between Sept. 1st,1931, and April 1st, 1932, because by that time thevarious associations had been informed by theMinistry that if any further agreements were madethey were ultra vires, and that therefore local authori-ties who made such agreements after that date didso in the knowledge that they were breaking the law.

Mr. GREENWOOD said that this bombshell fell onlocal authorities towards the end of August, 1931.A large number of officers and servants agreed to areduction of their salaries on condition that arrange-ments were made to deal with the.problem of super-annuation. If it was admitted that there was a casefor Parliamentary intervention where local authoritiesacting in good faith had broken the law, it seemed tohim that six months was too short a period. Hehoped the Government were prepared to be reasonableon this matter, and allow a year for the completionof negotiations which were started as a result of theGovernment’s policy.Mr. ISAAC FOOT said he was sure it was the desire

of the Government in carrying through this Bill toleave no rough edges.Mr. M. BEAUMONT said that any local authority

which embarked on these arrangements after the dateproposed by the Government knew very well thatthey were doing an illegal action, and they ought notto be safeguarded.The amendment was negatived.Mr. GREENWOOD moved to insert after the word

" understanding " in the clause the words " with theparties concerned." He said that he had an amend-ment later on to make it clear that officers or servantsto whom the Asylums Officers’ Superannuation Act,

1909, applied should be brought within the Bill. Heunderstood that the Ministry of Health were preparedto consider the inclusion of these officers in the Bill,but there was some doubt as to whether an under-standing arrived at between the Mental Hospitals’Association and those employed at mental hospitalswas a bona-fide understanding within the terms ofthe Bill. Medical officers and nurses at mentalhospitals were prepared to accept a reduction ofsalary when the Government came into office, butthey naturally desired to protect their superannuationrights, and what he regarded as an understandingwas reached. The employing authority, and thosewho served the employing authority, had asked todiscuss the question with the Minister of Health, butthat he had refused. If the spirit of this Bill was tooperate the Government ought to include within itsscope people in the mental hospitals’ service. Hehoped that the Parliamentary Secretary to theMinistry of Health would give an assurance that theunderstanding, as he regarded it, reached betweenthe mental hospitals’ authorities and their employeeswould be regarded as an understanding within theterms of this Bill.

Mr. SHAKESPEARE said he thought he could assurethe right hon. gentleman that the asylum officerswould be treated in exactly the same way as anybodyelse. They would be included in this Bill if in factan understanding was made in good . faith. Hepresumed that an understanding would have beenreached between the visiting committees and theirofficers, and if that understanding was made in goodfaith the officers would come within this Bill. Theright hon. gentleman’s amendment would make itfar more difficult for them to come in.

Replying to further questions by Mr. GREENWOOD,Mr. SHAKESPEARE said that every fact would be

taken into consideration. If agreements had beenreached between national bodies that, of course,would be evidence that there was an understanding ;but local agreements where they existed would beconsidered too in deciding whether individual personscame under the Bill.Mr. GREENWOOD said that Mr. Shakespeare had

pushed the responsibility back on to the individualvisiting committees. His (Mr. Greenwood’s) originalcase was that the Mental Hospitals Association,which represented the majority of mental hospitalauthorities in this country and certain national bodies,including the British Medical Association, did arriveat an understanding. Now they were told by theParliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Healththat it would be a matter for each visiting committeeand he wanted to know whether an agreement wasan agreement when it was national, or only when itwas local. The answer that it might be both did nothelp very much. If Mr. Shakespeare would lookinto this matter before the Report stage of the Billhe would not press the point any further at thatstage.The amendment was withdrawn.Captain ELLISTON moved an amendment the terms

of which he said would enable local authorities toreconsider their position in regard to the Bill, andif it was right and proper adjust the superannuationcut in the case of those officers whose pensions theywished to secure. He had heard something of thecircumstances in which the Association of MentalHospital Workers were placed. On the publicationof the original memorandum of the Ministry ofHealth, No. 1122, in September, 1931, that Associationmet to see whether they could suggest any reduction,and consulted the British Medical Association and theRoyal Medico-Psychological Association, and otherbodies interested, and submitted a scale of reductionswhich was welcomed by the visiting committees.The Ministry of Health pointed out that subject tothe amendment of the Asylum Workers’ Superannua-tion Act the pensions must be based on the actualsalary paid. The Association passed on that warning

Page 2: PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE

106

to the local authorities, and out of 66 hospitals outsideLondon, advised by that Association, 9 made noreductions and were therefore not affected by thisBill ; 24 of the hospitals, anxious to safeguard thepension rights of their officers, and seeing what otherauthorities were doing, continued, in spite of theMinistry’s warning, to make superannuation deduc-tions based on the original scale ; 27 other hospitals,who wished to do the right thing, acted on the adviceof the Ministry. The position under the Bill would bethat those hospitals which defied the Ministry wereto be whitewashed or indemnified, while the 27 whichfelt themselves bound to act in accordance with theMinistry’s advice would be outside the terms of theBill. This would be a big injustice, and he hopedthat his amendment would be accepted.

Mr. SHAKESPEARE said he was particularly sorrynot to be able to accept the amendment because heknew the interest which the hon. Member took inthese cases. The amendment, however, cut at theprinciple of the Bill which was non-contentious. Theamendment would bring in cases of cuts which werenot made on the understanding that they should notaffect pensions, but were made with the knowledgethat the cut or lower pay must be followed by lowerpensions. Another reason which made the amend-ment unacceptable was that the principle was appliedfirst to personal pension which was against theprinciple of all Superannuation Acts.The amendment was withdrawn, and the Bill

passed through Committee and was reported to theHouse.

Department of MinesOn Thursday, June 29th, the House of Commons

went into Committee of Supply on the Civil Estimates,Sir D. HERBERT in the chair.On a vote of £204,079 for the salaries and expenses

of the Department of Mines,Mr. E. BROWN (Secretary for Mines) said the

estimate showed a decrease of 14,516 compared withthe last year’s figures. Dealing with the questions ofhealth and safety in the mines, Mr. Brown said thatthey gave rise to two problems-that of undergroundlighting and that of minimising the casualties due tofalls of roof. The fatal accident rate rose slightlyfrom 859 in 1931 to 881 in 1932, and serious’ non-fatal accidents fell from 3305 in 1931 to 3212 in 1932,when the figure was the lowest on record. It wasdifficult to see how effective and general action couldbe taken in regard to underground lighting apart fromgeneral regulations. With regard to falls of roof,the Department would do everything possible to seethat the research work which had been carried outbore fruit as soon as possible.The debate on the vote was adjourned.

A Prisoner’s Mental Condition : Criticism ofMedical Officer

On Friday, June 30th, the House of Commonswent into Committee of Supply on the Civil Estimates.Sir D. HERBERT (chairman of committees) was in thechair.On a vote of £5,141,915 to complete the sum

necessary for the salaries and expenses of the policein England and Wales, -

Sir JouN GILMOUR (Home Secretary) said a largepart of the time of the police was taken up withminor offences, such as traffic offences, most of whichwere connected with motor-cars. In fact theseaccounted for 43 per cent. of all the criminal pro-ceedings taken in 1931. Except for these trafficoffences there h’.1d been in recent years a decreasein almost all classes of non-indictable offences,including drunkenness, assault, begging, sleeping-out,and offences against the poor-law. It was gratifyingthat there was, broadly speaking, an improvementin the general social conditions and social behaviour.There had also been a decrease in the gravest formsof crime, such as those involving the taking of life.There had been no increase over the past 20 years.The total number of persons killed in traffic accidents

in Great Britain in 1932 showed a slight fall, being6667 as against 6691 in the preceding year. Thetotal number of persons killed or injured was 213,117,as against 208,810. There was a drop of nearly 200in the number of persons killed in accidents attributedto mechanically propelled vehicles ; this, on theother hand, was nearly counterbalanced by theincrease in the number of persons killed in accidentsattributed to pedal cycles. It was clear that a greatmajority of these accidents must have been pre-ventable by the exercise of greater care on the partof motorists and pedestrians. After further debatethe vote was withdrawn.

On a vote of £445,063 to complete the sum necessaryfor the salaries and expenses of the PrisonCommissioners and of the Prisons in England andWales,

Brigadier-General SPEARS called attention to thecase of Thomas Parker, aged 34, who died in WinsonGreen prison on June 2nd. This man, who wasdestitute, was arrested for sleeping out and was sentto prison for 14 days by two magistrates of theColeshill Bench. Parker went to prison quietly andgave no trouble, but a warder noticed that he wouldnot keep his cell door closed, although repeatedlytold to do so. During the second night of his imprison-ment he was disturbed and agitated and kept onshouting that he had committed no crime and thathe must get out of gaol, even if it was in a coffin.At exercise next morning Parker fell out, said he wasdone, and from then onwards he behaved like a manin a frenzy. The acting governor sentenced him tothree days solitary confinement on bread and water.The prison doctor, at the inquest, stated he noticedin the warder’s report that he had to close Parker’sdoor on certain occasions and that Parker seemed tohave had some reluctance to having the door closed.Brigadier-General Spears quoted from a newspaperthe statement of the medical officer that Parkermight have been suffering from claustrophobia,though he had given a certificate that he was ina fit condition to undergo solitary confinement,and he (Brigadier-General Spears) pointed out thatthe doctor’s evidence was in contradiction to theanswer which Mr. Hacking (Under-Secretary to theHome Office) had given to him (Brigadier-GeneralSpears) the other day, when questioned aboutParker’s case. To make matters doubly sure healso consulted a great London alienist and laid theevidence he had before him. The alienist said thatthere was no doubt that this man was suffering fromsome form of claustrophobia. The acting governorof the prison, armed with the doctor’s certificate,condemned Parker to three days solitary confinement.He was no doubt applying the regulations andcarrying out his orders as a non-commissioned officerwould do, inexorably and mechanically. Some menwould have taken into consideration the fact that thisman’s crime was only that of not having a roofabove his head, and would have investigated what themental condition of the man was. During theshort journey from the adjudication-room to thesilent cell Parker was so injured that within a quarterof an hour or so he was dead. No one actuallysaw him fall. The warders released his arms for amoment and Parker took a flying jump forwarddown a flight of stone steps. He landed at the footof the steps in a spread-eagle fashion and thenstruggled up on his knees. He received a terribleinjury at the back of the head behind the ear. He wastaken to the cell and the next time he was looked atit was found that he was dead. He (Brigadier-GeneralSpears) begged the Government to consider whetherthis story did not lead to the conclusion that theadministration of Winson Green prison requiredinvestigation. Above all did they not think that theVagrancy Act ought to be repealed ?

Sir FRANCIS FREMANTLE said that it must berealised that the governors of prisons had an

immensely difficult task. They had to consider thereal facts of the case. Brigadier-General Spears had

Page 3: PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE

107

talked of claustrophobia, but he (Sir F. Fremantle)imagined that everyone would recognise the dangerof carrying things too far if that description wereapplied to the objection of every prisoner to beingshut in a cell. Medically speaking the word claustro-phobia, like many of the terms used in psychologicalmedicine, had an indefinite meaning; its generalmeaning was very clear, but it was indefinite. Onecould not define it clearly except by a general assess-ment of the individual’s honesty in explaining hisfeelings, being able to analyse them himself, and tocommunicate them to the medical man examininghim. It was extremely difficult to be sure of thatcondition in a person. There was the greatest dangerin bringing claustrophobia into legislation, if onlybecause there was some claustrophobia in the case ofevery prisoner. What was required was a very closesupervision of prisoners, especially those of nervoustemperament, during the whole time they were inprison without waiting until they complained of oneparticular trouble or another.

Earl WINTERTON asked whether Sir F. Fremantlethought it was probable that an injury of such a kindas that which caused this man’s death would not havebeen noticed by two or three people who were

standing near when he fell.Sir FRANCIS FREMANTLE said that it depended

entirely on the nature of the injury. In the Armythe commanding officer was responsible for the healthof his troops, and not the medical officer. Thecommanding officer who was responsible had totake the advice of the medical officer and decide howfar he would accept that advice. What he (SirF. Fremantle) wanted to know was whether thegovernor of a prison was in a similar position, or didhe think that it was a question solely for the medicalofficer ? He thought that the only proper rule ofsupervision, whether in the prisons or in the army,was for the layman to be responsible, though he mighttake the advice of the medical officer. He was afraidthat there were some prisons-Winson Green prisonmight be one of them-where the governors did notrecognise it as their duty to be,in active and constanttouch with medical officers and to give the medicalofficers as much latitude as possible in carrying outtheir difficult job of supervising the condition ofthe prisoners and reporting upon it. Was there anyscheme for insisting on some kind of training ofprison governors in the main outlines of the care ofhealth and mentality ? The new line of thought whichhad developed during the last 10 or 20 years as tothe necessity of understanding the physical and mentalhealth of individuals before efficient work or behaviourcould be expected from them was a line of progressthat must be brought into our prison management.The case before the Committee offered a good oppor-tunity to raise questions which had a far widerbearing.Mr. HACKING (Under-Secretary to the Home

Office) said that his information was that Parker,after he got into prison, was unruly and almostviolent practically the whole of the time. It wastrue that the behaviour of this man might have beenan indication of claustrophobia ; but the prisondoctor said quite clearly that in his opinion thiscomplaint was not the cause of the man’s death.Cases of this kind were not at all uncommon, andit was exceedingly difficult to diagnose. The medicalofficer did not state that the prisoner suffered fromclaustrophobia, nor did he suspect it, nor was thereany reason to suspect it. With regard to Sir F.Fremantle’s question the governor of any prisonwas of course responsible for the health of theprisoners, but naturally he accepted the advice ofone who knew a great deal more about health mattersthan he could possibly do, and he was always guidedin such matters by the prison doctor. A governor,for example, did not sentence a prisoner to punish-ment unless the medical officer certified that theprisoner was fit for the punishment.

Sir FRANCIS FREMANTLE asked whether the governorsimilarly gave weight to the opinion of his medical

officers as regarded the mental psychology of theprisoners.

Mr. HACKING said that certainly the governor ofa prison did so, as was done in this case. The evidenceon which the mental specialist consulted by Brigadier-General Spears based his opinion was apparentlybrought to his notice after Parker was dead. It wasnot previously in the possession of the prison medicalofficer who on hearing it agreed that claustrophobiawas a possible explanation of Parker’s frenzy. Buthe had previously had no reason to suspect such acondition. The cororier’s jury came to the decisionthat the cause of death was accidental ; there wasno rider and no blame was attached to anyone.While having every sympathy with the man’s rela-tives he (Mr. Hacking) could not see that any furtheraction was necessary or desirable.

Sir FRANCIS FREMANTLE : Are there any qualifica-tions demanded on the appointment of governorsor deputy governors with regard to seeing that theyhave some elementary knowledge of health conditions,sanitation, and psychology ?

Mr. HACKING : Not as a general rule, althoughsome governors have special knowledge. Continuing,the hon. Member said that he did not think it wouldbe right to lay it down that a man should be dis-qualified from taking a position of this sort because hedid not possess special knowledge of medical subjects.

Sir FRANCIS FREMANTLE said he did not ask forpecial knowledge.

Mr. HACKING said that after all the governorshad advisers, the medical officers, and they wereright in accepting the advice of a man who hadreal specialist knowledge, especially in cases of thiskind.

After further debate, progress was reported.

HOUSE OF COMMONS

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 28TH

Committees and Commissions

Mr. HORE-BELISHA (Financial Secretary to the Treasury)informed Mr. GROVES that, excluding Standing and Statu-tory Committees, &c.; there were 23 Committees andCommissions still sitting. Among them were the following :Committee for the codification of the law relating toincome-tax (appointed October, 1927); *Committee to

inquire into the recruitment, &c., of Local Governmentofficers (appointed September, 1930); *Committee to

inquire as to the inclusion of turpentine poisoning andpapilloma among industrial diseases entitling to work-men’s compensation (appointed November, 1930); Com-mittee to consider the grouping of enactments in relationto Local Government and Public Health law consolidation(appointed December, 1930) ; *Committee to investigatethe cause of the shortage of officers and nurses in themedical and dental branches of the defence services

(appointed May, 1931) ; Committee to make recommenda-tions as to the future development of garden cities

(appointed July, 1931); *Committee- to consider thecausation of mental disorder and the value of sterilisationas a preventive measure (appointed June, 1932) ; Com-mittee to inquire into precautions against overwinding inmine shafts (appointed February, 1933); *Committee toconsider methods of securing proper standards of fitnessin working-class houses and promoting the supply ofsuch houses (appointed March, 1933).The committees marked with an asterisk might be

expected to present their reports in the course of thepresent year.

Dummy Corpse as Warning to MotoristsSir GIFFORD Fox asked the Minister of Transport

whether his attention had been called to the action of thepolice at Reigate in exhibiting two overturned motor-carsand a dummy corpse as a warning to motorists ; andwhether, in view of the possibility that such action mightmake many new drivers nervous and thereby cause moreaccidents than it would prevent, he would discourage

Page 4: PARLIAMENTARY INTELLIGENCE

108

such action in future.-Sir JOHN GILMOUR replied : Ihave obtained a report from the chief constable of Reigate,who informs me that the exhibition in question wasorganised by the local branch of the National " SafetyFirst " Association, of which the chief constable is hon.secretary. The exhibition formed part of an extensiveprogramme of safety first displays held in connexionwith the safety first week at Reigate from June 5thto 10th. The exhibition consisted of one or two oldmotor-cars placed at certain sites off the main road onwhich posters and other matter advertising the safetyfirst week were fixed. A similar exhibition was givenlast year, and the chief constable states that no reportswere received that anyone was alarmed or shocked bythe display. This year a firm of press photographers,without authority and before the representation wascomplete, used the opportunity to take and publish aphotograph of a person lying near the scene and posedas if injured as the result of the accident. This was no

part of the exhibition organised by the Association, and Ijoin with my hon. friend in deprecating the action taken.

THURSDAY, JUNE 29TH

Ambulance Service and Boundary RestrictionsMr. DoRArr asked the Minister of Health if he was aware

that local arrangements for the use of an ambulance didnot permit an ambulance to render aid, even in the caseof a serious accident, in an adjoining district; and ifhe would call a conference of all the metropolitan andlocal authorities concerned with a view to legislation toput an end to the present conditions which endangeredthe life of an injured person.-Sir E. HrtLTON YOUNGreplied : I am not aware that the position generallythroughout the country is as stated in the first part of thequestion. I am causing inquiries to be made into thecircumstances of the case recently reported in the pressin which difficulty arose, and I will consider whether anygeneral action is necessary.

Rents of Council Houses

Mrs. WARD asked the Minister of Health whether hewas aware that a disparity existed in many local govern-ment areas between the rents charged by the loca Iauthorities for houses recently erected by them and forthose erected by them some time ago ; and whether,with a view to removing the dissatisfaction caused thereby,he would consider the desirability of issuing a departmentalcircular to local authorities recommending that by amethod of pooling, or otherwise, they should render suchrents as uniform as could practically be done.-Sir E.HILTON YOUNG replied : The reply to the first part of thequestion is in the affirmative, the disparities resulting inpart from variations in building cost and in part fromdifferences in the conditions prescribed by the several Actsunder which subsidies are payable. Such a pooling ofrents as is suggested in the second part of the questionwould involve the raising of rents which are at presentlow as well as the reduction of rents which are at presenthigh, and in view of the needs of the less well-paid working-classes I should not be prepared to encourage a generalarrangement of this kind. Circular letters have alreadybeen issued to local authorities which deal with thismatter.

Motor Accidents and Emergency TreatmentMr. JOEL asked the Minister of Transport whether he

would consider raising the charge for motor drivinglicences from 5s. to 7s. , earmarking the extra 2s. for

hospitals to reimburse them for the cost of road accidents ;and whether he would in any case investigate the financialeffects of such a proposal.-Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM(Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport)replied : Proposals on the lines of that contained in thefirst part of my hon. friend’s question have been madefrom time to time, and most recently in a debate in theHouse of Lords on June 22nd, on the occasion of thesecond reading of the Road Traffic (Emergency Treatment)Bill, as a result of which the Bill now stands referred to aSelect Committee. My hon. friend will carefully considerany report that the Committee may make.

Causes of Colliery ExplosionsMr. Ton2 SMITH asked the Secretary for Mines how many

public inquiries were held by his department during1930, 1931, and 1932 into the loss of life due to explosions;and how many prosecutions were instituted as a result ofthe inquiries.-Mr. ERNEST BROWN replied : During theyears 1930, 1931, and 1932, 11 public inquiries were

held, under Section 83 of the Coal Mines Act, 1911, intothe causes of colliery explosions. Such inquiries are held,as the Act directs, for the purpose of determining thecause and attendant circumstances of the explosion.Any necessary investigations as to alleged offences againstthe Act are made by H.M. Inspectors, whether a publicinquiry is instituted or not ; and in respect of one of theexplosions which was the subject of a public inquiry,legal proceedings were taken against the colliery manage.ment.

Houses Completed with State AssistanceMr. PRICE asked the Minister of Health if he would

furnish a return showing for the years ended March 31st,1932 and 1933, separately, the houses completed by localauthorities with State assistance, by private enterprisewith State assistance, and without State assistance,respectively.-Sir E. HILTON YOUNG replied : The follow-ing is a statement showing the number of houses com-pleted in England and Wales during the years endedMarch 31st, 1932, and March 31st, 1933 :—

Excluding houses of a rateable value exceeding £78 (£105 inthe Metropolitan area).

MONDAY, JULY 3RD

Air Ambulance Service in the HighlandsMr. KxRgwooD asked the Secretary of State for Scot.

land if he would bring before the Department of Healththe advisability of organising an air-ambulance servicefor the conveyance of urgent medical and surgical casesfrom the Hebrides and Western Isles to the hospitalsand infirmaries in Glasgow; and if he would con-

sider the advisability of arranging a scheme withthe Saint Andrews Ambulance Association and theHighland Medical Service, so that there could be coöpera-tion.-Mr. SKELTON (Under-Secretary of State forScotland) replied: t The suggestion contained in the

question involves a number of practical difficultieswhich would require most careful consideration beforeits adoption.

DISPOSAL OF LONDON REFUSE.—Speaking on

June 30th at a luncheon of the Advisory Committeeon London Refuse, Sir Hilton Young (the Ministerof Health) said that he must strike a warning noteabout the hills of refuse which were being accumu-

lated on the outskirts of London at the rate of about amillion tons a year. Unless the work was properly done,these hills of refuse would become a sanitary danger.In the past the work had not been properly done in allcases ; he could not say that it was being properly donein all cases even now. There was also room for improve-ment in the methods of collection. The primary respon-sibility was with the 28 metropolitan boroughs and theLondon corporation, and they had to coordinate theirwork with the authorities of the districts round Londonwhere the refuse was tipped. Most certainly some

coordinating authority was necessary, and the hope wasthat the advisory committee would achieve the necessaryimprovements by voluntary cooperation.


Recommended