AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Parliament and Petrol.

10th August 1916, Page 13
10th August 1916
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 13, 10th August 1916 — Parliament and Petrol.
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

The First Official Announcement of a Quantitative Character.

The discussion on the Consolidated Fund (No. 4) Bill, in the House of Commons, on the motion for third reading, on the afternoon and evening of the 1st inst., provided the opportunity for a discussion and what we may term a field day" on the part of those members who were lucky enough to catch the Speaker's eye. So far as we can gather Mr. W. Joyason-Hicks„ M.P., that stalwart protagonist of motorists' cla•ims,,did not...come within that category. We are sorry that he was deprived of putting forward the facts and figures with which we have every reason to believe he was "simply bursting."

Sir F. Banbury's Contribution.

Sir F. Banbury, as befitted one of the members for the City of London, again took the opportunity to put forward certain points of interest to commercialmotor users. We take certain passages from his speech. It will be observed that he touches upon the vexed question of the treatment of tank steamers by the Ad,miralty.

If it is necessary for the more successful waging of the war to inflict inconvenience on people using either private or public motor vehicles, I should be the last man to object to that being done. We all have to put up with inconvenience, and we as a nation, I think, have shown that in the vast majority of cases we are quite willing to put up with that, or any other inconvenience, which is necessary to pursue the campaign to a successful issue. While I hold these views very strongly, I think the Government must remember, and the Petrol Committee must remember, that Englishmen do not care to be treated unfairly,

and that the duty, both of the Government and of the Petrol Committee, is to administer the particular subject which they are called upon to administer in a fair and proper manner. It is no excuse to say, "We have not any time to attend to it," or "We have not a staff." If the Committee have not time to attend to it, they should not take up a job; and if they did take it up, they were bound to carry it out in a proper and businesslike manner.

There is no question of any joy rides, or anything of that sort; my ear is only used for the purpose of taking me to the station to come to this House—I happen to live six and a half miles from the station--and for duties connected with my magisterial work in my county. I said, "Fill up the form

properly." So far as I remember, it was 15 gallons a month. I receive 6 gallons in a month; 1/ gallons a week, and it takes me a gallon to go to the station, so I can go once to the station. I approached one of the members of tho committee. I said, " I think you have made a mistake, you probably have not seen the form I filled up, end when I tell you what has happened you will be inclined rather to increase the allowance." He said, "Oh !. no, Certainly not ! We cani not do anything of that sort." I said, "Why not!" and he said, "We do not look into individual cases. We have not time. What we do is this: We find out how much petrol used to be given, and we say, 'A person applies for a 100 gallons; we will give him so much. Another applies for 50 gallons; We will give him so much. Another applies for 20; we will give him so much ' "--the percentage, I believe, decreass lug slightly as the amount rose. That seems to me to be a most extraordinary way of undertaking a duty. We do not want a committee to do that. A clerk could do that. A small staff of elei-ks could do that. We do net want all the paraphernalia of a committee merely to receive an application for 100 gallons and to give so much, afid another applicant, for 50 gallons and to give so ranch. I might bring forward any number of examples. I will leave the question of the Petrol Committee to consider the question of the manner in which the Government has dealt with the supply of petrol, because that has also something to do with it. It was only a short time ago that we had a discussion in this House on the Vote of Credit,

about 10 oil tankers,

and -we were informed by the Parliamentary Secretary to the War Office that the Admiralty had taken those 10 oil steamers and filled them with barrels. I believe they did so under the

impression—I am not quite sure about this—that they would not sink if they had barrels in them. They found that the experiment was useless, and they had to take out all the barrels. Those barrels are blocking up space which is tecittitad for something else wanted for the war. The cost of this experiment, including the loss of the steamers to the country for some time, was something like £800,000. The right hon. gentleman (Dr. Macnamara) said that it was an experiment owing to the war, and he was a little angry with me because I said it; was owing to the inefficiency of the Admiralty. It is quite evident that, while the Government knew that this question of petrol was important they must have known that, if they made experiment, upon these steamers, they would lose the opportunity of importing a large quantity of petrol into this country. They. might.have made the experiment by filling one steamer with 'barrels, not the whole 10, and so found out whether or not the experiment was a success, while, in the meantime, they might have used the remaining nine steamers to bring the petrol over.

I might mention that in discussing the matter with one member of the Petrol Control Committee I was told I could use horses. It isnot everybody who has horses at the present moment. If they have horses, as in my case, they have no men. All my men have gone to the war', with the excep. tion of my head man.

Mr. Harcourt' s Statement.

We have decided to give the statement by Mr. Harcourt, as the official statement of the Board of Trade, seeing that. he is the headinf that department during the temporary indisposition of Mr. Runciman, pretty fully. It is the first official announcement, on behalf of the Government in which .important facts as to quantities are disclosed..

It may shorten the discussion on petrol and he for the convenience-of the House if I tell them now as much as I can on the matter. _ First Of all, we have -to consider the circumstances Athich led to the present situation. There is

plenty of petrol in the world available, but the supply in this country depends upon a sufficiency of what are called tankers or oilers—ships specially constructed for the carrying of petrol in bulk. At the outbreak of war there were barely sufficient of these ships for our then consumption, but since the War our consumption has greatly increased, and at the -same time the supply of tankers has diminished. It has diminished for several reasons. First of all, because of submarine accidents—those were insignificant in themselves, but annoying; secondly, the diversion of certain neutral American oil ships to trading in what they regarded as safer seas—such as trading -with the con,tinent of South America; and, thirdly, there was the commandeering of commercial tankers by the Admiralty. What happened was that the number of oil-burning battleships and other ships WA greatly increased and had been greatly accelerated, but the oilers to serve them were slower in delivery. Both Admiralty and commercial tankers were being built to meet the needs of these new ships, but they could not be built quick enough for the purpose. The fact is that all the labour in the shipyards for a long time was necessarily taken for warships. The residue of labour that was left was required for commercial and trading ships of..all kinds, and could not he devoted merely to the production of oilers or tankers. From the very first day I went to the Board of Trade—only about nine weeks ago—I pushed on with the completion, the very urgent completion, of tankers that were nearly ready to take the sea and make their first voyage. Bat I am sorryto say that on the first day I got them on the water ready to sail with their petrol they were

commandeered by the Admiralty.

Well, I did not complain. l's'es, I did. After a good deal of 'discussion I recovered some of them, but only a fraction. I recovered only one out of three. The whole of these difficulties really depend upon the unforeseen and unforeseeable [Why ?— ED.] rapidity of the delivery of oil-driven battleships, which, from another point of view, is, of course, a great satisfaction to the country. Tankers are wanted by the Admiralty for the delivery and storage of heavy and other oils. There is no dispute as to this necessity. There can be from our point of

view no dispute as to the surrender of absolute necessities to the Admiralty. At the same time, the Army requirements have grown enormously, and are constantly increasing—I mean for petrol. What the recent push ill Picardy meant in the way of petrol

would stagger this House, but for quite obvious reasons I cannot give the figures. It is an interesting fact, perhaps not known to a great many people, that at Verdun, alter the lint week of its defence, nearly the whole of that battle has been -fought upon petrol transport, because all the lines of communication were destroyed, by .artillery or bombs behind the French lines. We contributed largely to the petrol for Verdun. We contributed gladly also. The French and the Italian supplies had to be taken to those countries either in our ships or at our expense, or our loss, because the petrol might otherwise come here as it was not required in France or in Italy. We do not complain, but -3ve have all of us got to go short. I should like some of those who de complain to try France or Italy for a few weeks tour, or still more if they coulalo get there, Germany or Alistria, and see if they were better off. They would find that In the Allied countries they would be much worse off than we are here. I have done what I could. I have scoured the whole world for oilers. Talk of tiger hunting, it is

not in it with tanker hunting.

It is a very exhilarating and exciting spott, but, unfortunately, the head of game ia very few. Thereis hardly a tanker in the world to-day of which I do not know theiposition, the owner, the tonnage, the capacity, and the charterer. They are as much sought after as first-folio " Shakespeares." But of the tankers which are within our jurisdiction we have requisitioned or commandeered all. Others there are that belong to.powerful neutral countries which are accustomed to combine and control their oil on a big scale, and have fought shy of our seas, which they regard as risky; but I ought to say this, to remove a common misconception, that I can find no trace or evidence of cornering of petrol oh oil. We have a remunerative and hungry market. in this country. There has been, so far as I can discover, no holding up except for the want of vehicles for safe transport. You cannot convey petrol by sea safely or in large quantities in drums, or barrels, or tins. They are apt to leak, to vaporize, and then to ex plode. You must have tankers which are specially constructed, with proper ventilation. I am told even a benzine ship is unsuitable to carry petrol because petrel has such an exceptionally low flash. I hope the Admiralty will soon, perhaps very soon, 'be in a position 'Co launch and supply more tank steamers for their heavy oils, and so release petrol tankers which are now being used for that purpose. The construction of tankers, both for the Admiralty and for the public, has been resumed: There are many on the stocks which are being worked at now and accelerated., and I hope they will soon be available.

The House, in what I am saying, must not think that I am offering any apology or defence or excuse, because I do not think any is necessary. The Petrol Committee is the ogre of to.day, but it will not be very long before we can all come to the conclusion, not that we have been treated unfairly, as the right hon. baronet says, but' that we owe a deep debt of gratitude to the Petrol Committee -for the promptitude with which they have acted in a national crisis; and I am quite certain that the public some day will convey a proper meed of gratitude to Sir Oliver Bury, the chairman of that Committee, the ex-general manager of the Great Northern Railway, a man of great business capacity, who has devoted his whole time and energy and knowledge to the operations of that Committee. In my opinion it has acted at the proper time and in the right way. The result has been unpleasant to us all, but this is exactly one of those perhaps somewhat rare occasions on -which we might pause for a' moment and remind'ouraelves that1we are at war.

Other. suggestions have been made for dealing with the petrol difficulty. One was that 'we should stop all Sunday motoring. I wan rather inclined to that myself, but there were others whose opinions. I highly value who did not take the same view, and I know from discussing the matter that there are -many' arguments both ways; but I should like to warn the House that it may yettcome. I think everyone will agree that it is a sad sight in the middle of such a war as this to stand on the road leading from London to Maidenhead or to Brighton on a Sunday and count the cars which are going there. I had a count of those . cars rhiPfle two B48 Sundays ago. It happened to be a very wet day. At my, instance the Jockey Club has decided to licence no more race meetings after those which had been licensed at the time when I went to the Board of Trade, ending 10th August. I have taken all the action I can to deal with the matter. I was saying that on this wet Sunday outside Maidenhead and Brighton, where I had the ears counted, there were WO. I think 1 • ought to add, because there is a good deal of misconception on the matter, that they were all civilian. There was not one naval or military car on that day at either Brighton or Maidenhead.

A great deal of extravagance in Service cars has been alleged, and it may have been su.in the past, but I believe it is better now. Waste and. extravagance at the Front have also bean a good deal advertised in the papers. If it is true, we should regret it; but we should grudge it much less than • the other extravagance and waste at home, which are criminal.. I hope it. is not as bad as is believed. Largely, at my instance, an Army -Council instruction was sent out on 22nd June. I will read only the material parts of it ;—

"No lady or other unauthorized person will be per..

hatted to travel without the authority of the General Officer Commanding in any car for which free issues of petrol ate allowed on any pretence whatever, either in the company of an officer, or soldier, or 'otherwise. Strict disciplinary action will be taken against the driver of the vehicle or any officer or non-commissioned officerfor any disregard of this instruction. Owing to the urgent importance of economizing the petrol, no lootorcar will be used where railway facilities exist for any journey exceeding 40 mites, without the previous sanction of the General Officer Commanding. The Assistant Provost' Marshaland the military police have authority and are required to stop any War Department vehicle carrying ladies or civilians. Any instance where it appears that a prima facie ease of unauthorized travelling exists should at once be reported to higher authority."

I think that is a satisfactory circular, and it has had satisfactory results, but I should like to add that the man who washes his car in petrol, or who empties his aeroplane tank on the ground is -a traitor to the best interests of the Army and his country, and I hope he has ceased, or is ceasing to exist. If we can get the public and the `Army to realize that petrol is really as valuable and as necessary as high exPloaive, or as bread and meat, I think we shall do a great deal to cure some of our difficulties. If the public will exercise ordinary care and reasonable economy, everybody i might be happy n a short time, and I do not really regret this pinch if it brings the public to their senses in the matter of extravagance in petrol.

The House has had quite enough of causes and results: they will want to know. something about our methods of dealink with the situation. They have been drastic, but essential. The object of the Petrol Committee has not been 'to build up any reserve or to withhold any of the available supplies.

-They have made an estimate of what is in store and what is in eight, and their object is to ladle it out to the very last pint in proper quantities to the best national advantage. I am notpermitted to state the present requirements of the Army or the Navy, but they are Immeasurably and unforseeably greater than they were last year, or at the beginning of this year. Everyone will agree that those requirements must be met first, and therefore it is only the balance, after naval and military revirements are met, that is available for commercial and civilian life. All of. us have tci go short for a time, and I hope that time may be measured by months and perbaps by a few months, but I make no pledge. The problem was to see that the amount available wasaequitably distributed. What I wanted was distribution by quantity and not by price. If you left, this matter to a scramble on price, it would only be the rioh who would be satisfied, and commercial vehicles, omnibuses, taxi-cabs and people of moderate means would all have to do without:it. I have taken the other course; which I believe to be both just and economical. I know what is in store and what is in sight. We ask people their requirements, and then we distribute the petrol pro rata between classes according

to the urgency and 'utility of their service, The right hon. baronet suggests that there has been some exaggeration and untruthfulness. I am glad to say it has not been as great as the cynic might have expected. The right hon. baronet gave a figure. I did not quite know how he arrived at it, but it was correct.

The total civilian consumption last year was 111,000,000 gallons. The civilian requirements, as stated now on the returns they have made, are 153,900,000 gallons. That is au increase of 40 per cente over the civilian consumption last year. That might be regarded as rather an optimistic inaccuracy: There is no doubt that some people a hen asked about their requirements—but only a few—looked upon it in their statements rather as the schoolboy when he was asked to define a lie, and defined it as a very present help in time of trouble. But, on the whole, I am belied to say that honesty has predominated, even where it did not seem to be the best policy. There has been an enormous

Increase in the demand for commercial cars,

and they have been largely increased in number and consumption since the beginning of last year. Since the war began, of course, they have lost their horses and they have lost many of their men, and the use of commercial cars and their con

sumption of petrol have very greatly increased. Private cars, on the other hand, have decreased in number, partly from the absence of their owners at the Front, partly owing to the cost of petrol, partly from the necessity of domestic economy, partly from the voluntary surrender of pleasure, and partly, I hope, from the growing feeling that to-day joy=rides are shame rides.

The Petrol Committee received 324,900 demands for licences. That does not mean demands for 324,000 cards, because the London General Omnibus Company were able to send in one card for the whole of their fleet. To give some illustration of the work that is falling upon the Petrol Committee, I may mention that their post yesterday morning was over 20,000 letters.

I hope that we shall be ableeto give further consideration to classes and to individual eases when time and petrol permit. At the start we were bound to take what was the available reservoir and the supply in sight for twelve months and apportion it according to the national necessities.

Some 153,000,000 gallons were demanded in the returns for the whole of the civilian population. Only 70,000,000 gallium

are available, or less than half. We have already licensed 75,000,000 gallons, so that the House will see that we have .already outrun the constable, and we have no more available. This is for everything except the Army and Navy. The House will see that less than half the demands can be met. I will state the proportion in which this available surplus supply will be allocated. The owners of commercial ears will get 60 per cent, of their demand. Industrial processes will also receive 60 per cent, of their demand. Taxi-cabs, omnibuses, and public vehicles will get 50 per oent, of their demand. Doctors and veterinary surgeons will get the full amount up to a maximum of 50 gallons per month. Private cars a ill get 25 per cent, of their demand [This is the flaw.—En.] with a maximum of 30 gallons per month, and motorcycles will get 2 gallons per month. Perhaps I may tell the House what that means in petrol, and how it is distributed amongst the various classes. The petrol available for distribution in a month is 6,300,000 gallons, and this is how it is distributed : Commercial cars get 2,100,000 gallons, industrial processes 812,500 gallons, taxi-cabs, omnibuses, and public vehicles 2,087,500 gallonS, doctors and veterinary surgeons 418,750 gallons, private cars 700,000 gallons, and motorcycles 118,250 gallons, making up exactly the supply for the month of

6,300,000 gallons. That is all that is available. If hon. members say that A ought to have more petrol, then I say that B has got to have less.

The demands of the Army and Navy must be met. Then comes the conveyance of the wounded, then doctors and veterinary surgeons, and if any increase in petrol becomes possible at all, their 50 gallons maximum should be the first to have further consideration where a special need can be shown. Of course the carriage of munitions in this country is essential, and it must and will be provided for, even if it entails a total stoppage of private cars, and further limitation in regard to cabs an omnibuses. Two million eight hundred thousand gallons per month were asked for for private cars, and, as I stated just now, we have only 700,000 gallons available for 110,000 private cars. Therefore, they can only get one-quarter of their demands. It means that on an average they will get rather less than seven gallons per month for each private car. The noose mud remember that repeated notices have been issued 'earning the public that petrol stocks were low, and economy was necessary. Let me refer for one enoment to the right hon, gentleman's

point as to the assumed dishonesty of the people making the return. I believe that proof of the general honesty of the returns is to be found in the fact that the bulk of private owners, 85 per cent, of them, only asked for Erom eight to twenty-four gallons per month. Those who asked for eight gallons will get 75 per cent. of whit they asked for. Those who asked for 16 gallons will get 50 per cent., those who asked for 24 gallons will get 33 per cent., and thoie who asked for over 32 gallons will get only 25 per cent. NO one, a hatever he hamasked for, will get more than 30 gallons per month. On the whole, people have been fairly ooziest. Everyonelhas asked for more than he has got, and ne wants more, naturally. The situation as I found it called for prompt and energetic action. It was impossible to make detailed inquiries, as the right hon. baronet suggested should be done, in 324,000 cases of owners wilco represent a far larger number of cars. Drastic restrictions were necessary for our military and national needs. When those national and military needs have been adequately met and some further surplus seems available, we shall be delighted to distribute more petrol to the most deserving classes. I hope I have been able to convince the House that more we cannot do now.

The Alleged Hard Case Di the Taxi-driver.

Mr. A. Strausszpotte on behalf of taxi-drivers, but he did not touch upon the difficulty which arises in connection with this industry, viz., that a very high percentage -of the use Of taxicabs is undeniably for private purposes, and certainly much of this private use is in connection -with journeys which might equally well be performed by tithe, by motorbus, of on foot. There may be hardShip for,some taxi-drivers, the majority of whom have done, best. of everybody connected with the taxicab induStry, but they cannot, .so long as the line of demarcation is private use or business use, in respect of those supplies which are available over the quantities which are necessarily reserved for the Services of the 0/own., including munitions transport, seek to be the only group of users of motorcars who are to be specially' treated. Their contracts, in so far as they affect payments of instalments to the vendors of the, cabs, cannot be enforced to the extent of the interference properly ascribed to the war, as particularly exhibited by the action of the Petrol Control Committee. We give the-remaiks-which fell from the lips of Mr. Strauss, and We ask that they shall be considered in relation to our foregoing comment.

I feel that it is my duty to call the attention of the House to the disastrous effect caused' by the restrictions of the Petrol Committee on the driving of taxicabs. That. there is a lack of organization on the part of the Petrol Committeeel shall have no difficulty in showing. As soon as the licence census was called for the Union of Taxi Drivers were anxious to help the Government in economizing the use of petrel. With that object in view they communicated with the Petrol Committee, and urged all their members to apply for the very ,minimumquantity which they might possibly require, suggesting 90 gallons per month, Regardless of the assistance which the union gave the Petrol Committee, that committee allotted only 50 per cent, of the requisition to all the taxi drivers, thus penalize lag the honest ones and rewarding the dishonest ones. As an illustration of the result I will give a few figures. Gardner for one cab was allotted 140 gallons, Davis 70 gallons, Butler 18 gallons, and so on down to a man called Cove who was only allotted 10 gallons a month. These figures show that I am justified in saying that the Petrol Committee was guilty of want'of organization, if I may use no stronger term.

With the two gallons a day, which had been allotted by the Petrol Committee, a very large number of taxis will not be able to go on the road at all, and tho men will only be able to work three days a week. The consequence, of course, will be a great deal of inconvenience to the public, but I suppose that in these times we must not mention any thing about inconvenience. Everybody is inconvenienced. But what ought to be taken into consideration is that about 50 per cent.—indeed I am credibly informed that about 75 per cent.'—of the fares nowadays are men in khaki. The taxis are used for Army and Navy men who go from one station to another with their luggage. If they cannot get the taxis, of course, this will be prevented. The drivers are convinced that if proper restrictions were Ts q

made to other classes, something might be done to meet the situation. M the right hon. gentleman has mentioned, they might, of course, cause greater inconvenience to the owners of industrial cars. They might even impose greater pecuniary loss. But that would not have the effect which this restric-, tion has on the taxicab driver. 3t would not mean starvation and ruin. The right hon. gentleman in his speech gave us several instances in which restrictions might take place, partly in commercial and other businesses' which are not so important as taxi drivers. Therefore, the drivers are not far wrong in their supposition. They certainly do not owe the debt of gratitude to the Petrol Committee which the right hon. gentleman mentioned. The drivers are willing and anxious to . help the Government, and they suggest that, since Scotland Yard possesses a list of all the drivers who have licences, the Petrol Committee should work conjointly with the police authorities.

Views as to Joy-riding.

Mr. Wiles paid attention, next in the debate, to certain aspects not unconnected with joy-riding. He referred to this undesirable residuum of waste in no less condemnatory language than did Mr. Harcourt. He also spoke in favour of the taxi-cabby.

The right hon. gentleman gave us a very fair statement of the exact position as to petrol as it stands in this country, and I am sure we are all very glad to have that fair state' meat, because there was a feeling that there was something very mysterious about the management of the petrol, and also the .feeling—though I am very glad that this, also, has been cleared up—that members of both the Army and the Navy were joy-riding occasionally on petrol which might be used for other purposes. I am very glad, further, that We right hon. gentleman has told us; among many other things, that the number of cars Which were counted going to Maidenhead and' Brighton amounted to 600.

I want, where we can, to squeeze a little off the quantity allotted here and there, though it is rather difficult, perhaps. Still, the right hon. gentleman may have something up his sleeve—something about the steamers or tankers that are being built. We hope also that his advice to the Army will do good, and that these tales about cars being emptied in the field before being put into the garage, and stories of that kind, will not he heard more of. The other day I heard of cars being emptied in that way, and that sort of thing ought certainly to be stopped. I desire to support theobservations of the hon. member opposite who brought forward the case of taxicab drivers. I believe those drivers have been reduced by various advisory committees and by various tribunals to the minimum, or to what is considered the lowest amount that can be, arranged for that business in London, and other large towns. The men whoare concerned are mostly over military age, and, as the hon. gentleman opposite said, a considerable number of them own their own cars. They have not bought them, however, in the ordinary way. Some have one car and some two and they have got to pay for them

on the weekly or monthly hire system, and if‘they do not keep up their payments they may find that the whole amount which they have paid is likely to go in the same way as under the furniture hire-purchase system. These men have been careful and have saved money to buy their own cars, and I am trying to see if we cannot get a little more petrol for them, in order that they may carry on their business properly. The hon. member for Paddington stated quite correctly that three gallons a day is the minimum on Which a man can make his taxicab pay. Two gallons a day is not enough for him, because on that quantity he

cannot quite make his taxicab pay, with the expenses and hire-purchase money he has to pay. I am convinced that the last thing the right hon. gentleman wants to do is to put these taxicab drivers out of work, leaving their cabs to be returned to the garage. I do think that, in his ingenious way, the right hon. gentleman might conceive some plan of saving here and there in order to give the taxicab driver another gallop a. day, so that he would be able.totnake-his cab pay. If the taxicab driver gets the extra gallon we shalhbe.perfectly satisfied. I have made some suggestions to the right hon. gentleman where he can reduce the amount of petrol allowed, and I think that in the case of those 600 who ride to Maidenhead and Brighton the supply could be reduced very largely.

Sir Archibald Williamson, of Liverpool.

Sir Archibald Williamson spoke, in the course of his share in the debate, with considerable emphasis, and B50

we trust not without effect, from the standpoint of a Liverpool shipowner and merchant. He very rightly urged certain aspects of the tank-steamer "muddle."

We have had a very interesting statement from the right hon. gentleman as to the allocating of available petrol, but I would rather direct the attention of the House to the reasons why we are in this difficulty, and to that want of prevision and co•operation there has been in the -Government Department, which has brought us into this position, so that we may see, after what has happened, whether we cannot devise a better way in future, ands avoid this great inconvenience and loss to the country. If we take the Department of the Admiralty, we find that not very long before the war oil fuel was being used. It was found to Le a very great success; and when new ships were designed—and I understand even some ehip s were subsequently altered—they burned oil fuel instead of _coal. It might then have occurred to the Admiralty that when they were going in for this employment of oil fuel they ought to take care to build some oil tank steamers in order to have a supply in time of war. That does not seem to have been done. After the war began, when we were placing orders for some more war ships, I understand that the great bulk of them were oil burners, and still at that time no great attention appears to have been paid to providing on account of .the nation tank steamers to.-bring fuel for those war ships. Reliance seems to have been placed on the tank steamers which belong to private owners. That was

a very dangerous reliance,

because practically all of the tank steamers of private owners were used in bringing to this and other, countries the necessary oil for illuminating purposes, fuel purposes, petrol, and so forth. Consequently this provision could only be ,taken by the Navy at the risk of causing very serious interruption to commerce and to many other things, such as the necessities of life, the lighting of people's houses,,, so forth. Therefore, I say, that the Admiralty do not appear to have exerciied'any.provision in providing any large amount of tank tonnage. It IS quite true that since the matter became so urgent the Admiralty have taken a different course, and have, if I am correctly informed, laid down now quite a considerable number of tank steamers for their own needs, and have also converted a number of caIgo steamers for the same purpose. Unfortunately, tank steamers taken by the Admiralty were taken at first to an unnecessary extent. There was a considerable number of tank steamers which might have been filling up reservoirs and reserves, and which were used in a wasteful manner. The right hon, baronet the member for the City referred to one-instance, and there have been others. There was, for example, the excessive use of tank steamers as storage. • It has been suggested to the Admiralty that they might make more use of storage ashore. Unfortunately, at the same time private owners were unable to supplement the supply of tonnage by placing further orders. It is well known that in the shipyards work was suspended except for Admiralty account. Consequently, while the Admiralty took a number of the ships and the submarines caused certain losses, there was no increase of supply from the builders. That has been altered, now, but that was the state of things for a considerable time after-the outbreak of war. Apparently, as far as I can judge, there has been . no cooperation, until recently,

at any rate, between the different Departments of the Government as to the needs of fuel and petrol for the country. Each Department of the Government appears to have been working in a watertight compartment. Take the Army. Apparently, as long as there was petrol for the Army, the needs of commerce and of the other Departments were hardly considered by those who had charge of the Army. The .Army was for them the main thing, and as long as it got all the peteoI it required it really did not concern itself what was taking place at the Admiralty, the Board of Trade, or any other Departments concerned. I know, for example, that at the War Office, as long ago as last April, suggestions were made that they should endeavour to save the tank tonnage of the country and also economize i by bringing the petrol that they needed n France direct from America to France, instead of bringing it to England as they have been doing up to now. What happens? A tank steamer is filled with petrol and brought across the Atlantic to England. The petrol is pumped ashore into tanks, and afterwards from these

tanks put into tins, which are put into cases. There is a lot of labour employed in making the tins arid cases, and in shipping the cases aboard the steamer, and possibly bringing them by rail before they reach the steamer. They are. then taken across to France and brought to the Front. After the petrol has been used the cases and tins have to be returned to England, so far as they are not destroyed, and there is, of course, a certain percentage of wastage, but a considerable proportion are sent back again, and take up room in train and steamer, and again cause labour in this country discharging them. It surely seems evident, in this time of war, that we ought to try to economize labour' especially when we

can do so absolutely with economy. If this petrol were shipped from America direct to France, as has been suggested, you could ship it in a cargo steamer, and not require a tank steamer. What is the answer to that suggestion? The right hon. gentleman tells us that that would he a dangerous proceeding, because of the vapours from the petrol which would cause risk of explosion. Some steamers are fitted with pipes to take away the vapour, so that there is no adherent difficulty in doing that, and as a matter of fact, petrol is shipped today in the way I have described to other countries in Europe. Supposing it were the case that there is an extra risk; is not this one of the occasions on which we ought to take a risk of that sort while, of eoursa, at the same time taking every

• possible-precaution. We would thus save the valuable space . in the tank steamers and money by doing so.

The cases and tins we make cost 12s. 4d., and in America 2s, 6d.

It is true that those are different Cases, thin cases. The tins are not the same as our two-gallon tam, they are four-gallon tins in America, with two to the case, and ours are two-gallon tins with four to the case. The tine from America could be used for carrying water, or other things, and the wood of the cases for the trenches, as they do not require to be brought back there. You would save very considerably in transport, and I am informed by those who know that this suggested course would save 28s. per ton on the petrol sent to the Armyin France, while at the same time saving the tank steamers for use in the commercial interests of this country. At the time the suggestion was made it is extremely doubtful whether it could have been carried out promptly owing to the great demand for tins in America,. but certainly now they could be got in the course of a month to six weeks if the Board of Trade, Or rather the War Office, would give their serious consideration to the matter and not put it by as they did when it was suggested four months ago. That is one direction in which some alleviation might he found. 'The Board of Trade have had very little influence on naval or military waste until recently, and it is very likely he Board of Trade had itself no estimate of the quantity of petrol used in this country for commercial purposes as opposed to private use. I suppose until the census was taken the Board of Trade had

no very clear perception of the needs of commerce

in this country as regards petrol. However, now they have got an idea of the great quantity necessary. What do the figures reveal? They reveal that the commercial use is far greater than any use of petrol for joy riding or anything of that sort. Taking 315 gallons of petrol to the ton, I have converted the figures into tons. In 1915 the total imports of petrol into this country were, in tonna figures, 500,000 tons, a little less than half coming from America and a little more than half coming from the Far East. We have had from the right hon. gentleman the figures of the private consumption. The private consumers ask for 100,000 tons. But let us remember that there are many people who have applied as private consumers who are really using petrol for business purposes. Many men living in the country use their cars for going to and from their business. Contractors and men who are surveying building and other operations go round to look after the work in their cars. There is no doubt that these people apply as private consumers. Therefore, from the 100,000 tons for private consumers it would be fair to take at least 30 per cent, as being really for necessary commercial nurpoaes.

What is the commercial use?

.Rather more than double that of the private consumer—that is, rather more than 200,000 tons. There you have 300,000 tons between private consumption and commercial purposes. The difference between that and the total imports of 500,000 tons last year went for Government purposes. I understand that the Government requirements are now much greater. We will not speculate as to the figure, but the quantity is much greater. Here is the point I want to make. If the Government could by any means provide those people who have petrol to bring with one large steamer of 15,000 tons, or two steamers of 7500 tuns, or, if I am in danger of putting the figure too low, say three steamers—these steamers would bring over 100,000 tons a year—

the whole difficulty would be met.

I do not say that there would be plenty, but there would be ease in every direction. Trade and commerce would not be injured as they will be by the present shortage of supply. How can you get these steamers.? Some of us, rightly or wrongly, have an idea that if the Admiralty would really set their minds to this matter and avoid using steamers for storage purposes to theextent that they do—Dover is one place, Halifax (N.S.) another, and there are other places I need not mention where they have steamers lying up as storesthey.could squeeze two or three out of the very largenumber of steamers that they have—it would not be right for me to give the number of tank steamers they have, but it rune into hundreds—and that would relieve the whole situation.

The alternative to that is to acquire other steamers for the .purpose. i know that the' acting President of the Board of Trade said, quite truly, that he has looked round for steamers and found it almost impossible to get them in suitable condition. There are a large number building—far too many in my opinion for the needs of the world. There are 49 tank steamers building

in this country and 52 or 54 in the United States. That is apart from the steamers launched since the war began, and apart from the steamers ordered but not yet laid down. Consequently, you have between 100 and 150 steamers ordered or building. That is an enormous number. Taking an average capacity of 7000 tons, and five voyages a year, these tank steamers will carry 4,500,000 tons of oil. Consequently, we may look forward to a surplus of tank tonnage as soon as the war is over. Many of these steamers are now built, and so far as those in this country aye concerned, no doubt the Admiralty will requisition'every one of them as soon as they are ready. But the steamers that are being built in the United States and in Norway are available in addition if the Government see their way to acquire them. No doubt the price is exceedingly high. At present it is exorbitant, because if they are neutral steamers not liable to requisition they can get auch enormous freights that a neutral owner will not sell unless he gets a very long price. There is a steamer now ready—a boat of about 6000 tons. The price at which that steamer was offered to some friends of mine four er five monthsago was a little less than half the price at whichit is offered today. If the Government had foreseen four or five months ago what was4going to happen, they could have got that steamer for half what it would costthem to-day. -There is another steamer available in the United States in the month of October. I do not know whether the right hen. gentleman knows of this one. She is available for charter for 10 years at 12s. 6d. a ton. The presentrata is ovaa 50s.a ton, but this boat would take 12s. 6d.. for 10 years. That is, of course, a long time. The, Government rate in the Blue Book is 98. 6d., so-that the House can estimate what the loss would be. But that loss is not stupendous compared with the loss suffered by the country through.theawant -of petrol. Prices are very high at the present. time. Supposing the Government were to buy two steamers for the sole purpose of easing the Petrol situation, and supposing they were to lose 500,000 over the deal. That is to say, suppose they lost that on the depreciated value which will exist after the War. They will require the Eta-hers all the same. Therefore, they probably will not resell them, and realize their loss. Still, there is a loss on paper. Supposing that loss is £500,000. That is a far less loss than the count-y is suffering by the present policy. The--doss must be running into millions. We have heard a great deal about taxis and the loss to taxi drivers. That is a mere trifle compared with the loss the country is suffering. One would think that the taxis were really the important point; but taxis are not an important point at all. Take the case of the farmers. I have a farmer in my constituency who lives about 11 miles from the market and six miles from the station. When war broke out his horses were taken by the Government. He had to get to market and to the station, so he bought a cheap car. He now finds that the allowance of petrol is Bitch that he can not run his car. Consequently, he is suffering not only serious inconvenience, but great lose in his business. I have a letter also from a grocer in my constituency, who says that he has not a horse now, but has bought a car in which to deliver his goods. In consequence of the shortage of petrol he cannot deliver his goods B53 inthe country districts, and the people are suffering great loss and inconvenience through not being able to get their supplies. He writes that he cannot get a horse without great difficulty, and that if he could get one he could not get hay for it, because the Government have bought all the hay. Consequently there is very great and undoubted inconvenience and loss. I have here a letter from a gentleman who, from patriotic and public-spirited motives, helped to start a cooperative dairy system in Dorsetshire. He

writes :— " We now deal with upwards of 6000 gallons of milk per day. We have, at considerable cost, bought two or "three motor lorries this spring, and now take up milk from the farmers over a radius'hoi 10 or 12 ,miles, because their horses and men have gone for Army purposes. The Petrol Control Committee have given us as an allowance of 60 gallons per month, or 2 gallons aiday for two threeton motor lorries. We applied to them for 600 gallonsa month, which we use. If their decisian is held to we must shut down, as it is, of :course, impossible for us to go on."

The writer goes on to say : "You will see what a disaster this will be to the farmers in this district. How we are to carry out our contracts in London I cannot imagine. Milk must go to London for the. hospitals and other consumers, and to expect us to work on 2 gallons a day and to carry 6000 gallons of milk is impossible."

I only want to point out to the House that these are much more important matters than the question of whether or not

we get taxis. After all -a taxi-driver is not going to be very much hit, because there are thousands of jobs waitirig for him.

The taxi-driver can get a lob ;

and it ought not to be difficult for us to get about. Here in London there are undergrounds • there are other means of conveyance and people can get about to and fro in London, but these people in the country cannot. Their business cannot be run without something to move the goods which have to be moved. I have -perhaps said enough, to help the House to see that the Government have shown no foresight at all in regard to this matter. There does not seem to have been any co-operation between the Board of Trade, the Admiralty and the War Office as to what was coming. Within the last three months they seem to have appreciated what was going on. They did not buy steamers -when they might have done ! and it is only within the last two or three months that they have wakened up to what was obvious to everybody, that there was going to be a great scarcity of this very necessary article. As

an example of official ineptitude .

I think it would be very hard to beat the example of the treatment of "the petrol question by"our Government.

Mr. Butcher and Mr. Harcourt.

We now make certain extracts from the speech by Mr. Butcher, K. 0., followed by an intermediate reply from Mr, Harcourt, who at this point of the proceedings intervened in the debate, by way of meeting some of the points which had been raised..

Thefirst thing is that the Navy and the Army mast not suffer. There is another thing which I think the right hon. Gentleman did well to mention—that is, that at a time like the present

waste of petrol is a little short of criminal.

was glad to hear from him that stePs are being taken in the Army to avoid unnecessary waste of any sort or kind. We. have seen officers of the Army going long distances by motorcars when trains were available; we have heard of messages being sent by motercara when much less expensive modes of communication were possible: I am glad to think that the Army has taken the matter into consideration, and is going, at any rate, to reduce that form of waste.

There is another matter upon which the right hon. Gentleman touched. I hope he will give it a little further consideration than he has yet been able to give it, and that is the matter of pleasure or joy-rides. I suppose a great many people in the country like pleasure rides and think that joy'rides are a necessity of life. Whatever they may be in normal times, joy-rides cannot be held to be necessities of life during war time and during this stupendous crisis with which we are confronted. I hope kluge concerned will take their courage in both hands and stop joy-rides, at any rate on Sundays, for every class of the community. If there is equality all round I do not think anyone need complain. So much for the

354

points of agreement. When, however, the right hon. Gentle.. mail told us that_ the Petrol Committee had allotted their available supplies in the most equitable way possible, I confess I could not quite go with him. Let me take the case of a private motorcar. How is the petrol allotted to the private motorcar owner!

By some rule-of-thumb, according to the amount which

he demands,

and by no other consideration. I gather that the mode' adopted is this : You see what the man asks for and than give him a certain proportion of what he asks, that proportion diminishing according as the amount that he asks increases, and you leave entirely out of account the two most vital points, viz., whether the man has asked for more than he is entitled to, or needs, and, secondly, the purposes for which he is going to use it. See what abuses arise from that system ! That there are some dishonest men who made fraudulent returns I do net think the right hon. Gentleman will deny. There is the mere fact that the demand is more than last year. That conveys to my mind that, at any rate, there was a great deal of dishonesty in these returns. No doubt since war time the amount of petrol used in lieu of horses used for commercial purposes has been very -much increased, but allowing everything you like for the increase in commercial requirements, I think that part of that 40,000,000 gallons increase must be due to dishonest requirements. There has been

no investigation whatsoever into the honesty of the returns.

I should have thought that if a man had a private motorcar and demanded 100 gallons per Month, or something of that sort, prima facie-there was a strong case that he was making a fraudulent return. So far as I know there has been no inquiry into such a case. I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that if it could be done some of these cases of exorbitant demand should be inquired into, and if it is found that the return is.a fraudulent return, the man who has made it should be cut off from every drop of petrol in future. It may possibly give a lesson to all concerned that honesty is sometimes the right policy. So -much for the amount demanded as to which no inquiry is made.

Might I ask the right hon. Gentleman one question, which affiects not only myself, personally, but a very large number of farmers and others in the country ? What is the rule with regard to petrol used for

• pumping by petrol engines

in agricultural work ? Is the user of such an engine given the amount which he -has been in the habit of using, or is he given some less proportion? In my own ease, I require a small amount of petrol for the purpose of pumping water. I do not suppose I could live in the house without pumping water. I asked f or a very small amount, and I was rewarded by getting a half. Then, with regard to the farmer, is he•to get the fulP amount, or not?

" I was glad to hear from the right lion, Gentleman that some relief is coming in future, owing to the advent of some of these tankers, and I hope the state of things to which he has looked4orward will come about, and that "At no distant date "---to quote his own words—" I hope there will be further consideration for classes and more consideration for individual cases," though I am bound to say lie added some sinister qualification—" when time and petrol permit." I hope the Petrol Committee will find more time to discharge their duties so as to make a more equitable distribution, and I hope we shall be able to get tankers and a better supply of petrol, and so meet the commercial needs of the country.

Mr. Harcourt's Partial Reply.

I can, of course, only reply to oneAor two questions with the permission of the House. The hon. and learned Member who spoke last asked me whether pumping for agricultural machinery' was to receive its full -amount. Nobody receives his full aranunt—that is impossible. Agricultural machinery is treated like commercial cars for commercial requirements, and receives 60 per cent., which is the most anyone receives except a doctor. The hon. Member for Elgin and Nairn (Sir A. Williamson) spoke of two gallons a month having been given for agricultural lorries. That, of course' is an accidental error which will be pnt right at once, and they will get 60 per cent. The hon. Member for North Paddington (Mx. Strauss), who spoke, about taxi-drivers, believed that taxidrivers could not possibly make a living with only two gallons a day. Well, within the last two days I have spoken quite accidentally to taxi,drivers who have driven me to various points, and asked them whether they could make a living on two gallons a day, and they have said, " Yes, and as we shall have two gallons of paraffin mixed with it, on that we shall do very well."

There was another point raised by two hon. Gentlemen as to the special hardship on taxi-drivers who are in process of purchasing their cabs on the hire instalment system. In ordinary tames, if a taxi-driver, having paid a certain number of these instalments, ceases further Instalments the company which has made the bargain with him is able to confiscate the cab and any instalments paid up to that date. Happily, during the war, the Courts (Emergency Powers) Act comes in, and they are unable to do that without taking the matter into Court. I am quite certain that where a driver has been very strictly limited in the amount of petrol received and is able to show the Court that he is not able to continue paying the whole of the instalment, the Court will treat him with justice and equity. But there was one class of drivers I was anxious about, and these were the drivers who have begun their instalments on the hire-purchase system since the declaration of war, because they are not brought under the Courts (Emergency Powers) Act. They are not numerous, but quite sufficiently numerous to deserve consideration. I therefore collected together all the facts from the companies which sold cars on the instalment system, and I have from them a personal promise that those men who do not come under the Courts (Emergency Powers) Act, because they commenced their instalments since the beginning of the War, will be treated exactly like the other men, and get the same protection.

Sir J. Spear and Mr. Alphaeus Morton.

The. following extracts from the speeches of Sir J. Spear and Mr. Alphteus Morton are next to be noted.

Sir J. SPEAR : I thoroughly endorse the appeal that has been made that, as soon as possible, more petrol should be supplied both for trade and for agricultural machinery. I have been requested by doctors and veterinary surgeons in my neighbourhood to appeal to the right hon. Gentleman for a more ;liberal allowance, as it is absolutely impossible for them to carry on their professions with the amount of petrol that has been allocated. The right hon. Gentleman showed that he appreciated this. Surely we ought to use the petrol we have in perfecting human life and animal life, and also in business rather than in unnecessary pleasure, which is quite unjustifiable on the present occasion. We recognize that the right hon. Gentleman has done the best he can under the circumstances. I hope he will persevere with the suggestions he has made and get more petrol at the earliest possible moment for the professions I have mentioned, for trade and agricultural machinery, for they ought to be dealt with as liberally as possible. Mr. MORTON.: I want to say a few words in regard to

the public health department of the City of London and the use of petrol.

The City Corporation found it necessary, especially during the last two years owing to the short supply of men, to buy machines for cleansing purposes which use a good deal of petrol in order to keep the City in the clean state in which it has always been kept. They use 2500 gallons of petrol a month, and they applied for that amount. They did not think there were curious games going on anywhere, and they only asked for what is wanted. The Petrol Committee said they could have 1500 gallons. Now it is very necessary that we should keep the City in a clean state for sanitary reasons, and for the sake of public health. I congratulate the right hon. Baronet opposite (Sir F. Banbury) upon the fact that he represents a district which is the best kept in the whole world, and we want to keep up that reputation in the City. As a matter of fact, about 1,000,000 people come to the City every week. Of couise, on Sundays they do not come so much. About 400,000 of these people go into offices. I know we have been told that there is no population in the City, but the population is 1,000,000 in and out during every week. We cannot keep those people in a healthy state unless we can have the City properly swept and cleansed,

and it has been found necessary that wood paving and asphalte paving should be_washed down every night, and we can only do this by having petrol machines to take round our tanks. I trust that somebody will tell the First Commissioner of Works what has happened, and that he will, in the interests of public health in the City of London, which is the best-cleansed city in the world, consider the question of our demand, and at least compromise matters with them. I hope the hon. Baronet who represents the City of London will assist me in getting more petrol so that the City can be kept in a clean state. After what the right hon. Gentleman has said, I do not see any difficulty about it. It is only necessary

to get more ships which will probably not be very difficult, and than we shall have petrol enough to keep the ordinary business and the health of the nation at the highest possible point.

Mr. Lough's Summary.

Mr. Lough, as, often before, although not an avowed motorist, spoke well for their points of view. It appears to us, after reading the whole of the proceedings, that his speech approximates as closely as any other to the views whicti are held by many owners. The hon. gentleman, who spoke at the end of the debate, between 0.30.p.m. and 10 p.m., no doubt felt that he was being pressed by the imminence of other political discussions. We may remind our readers that it was on this occasion that the House sat all night to deal with Zeppelin and other matters.

The First Commissioner of Works, before he left the House, I understood, stated that he would reply to the whole Debate later on. Our difficulty is that he does not hear exactly the complaints which are made. 1 hope the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade will make some replv,to the specific questions which have been raised.

Ali. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. Whitley) : The right hon. Gentleman who has been acting for the President of the Board. of Trade has answered a number of questions by leave of the House, but we cannot allow those points to be gone into over again. Mr. LOUGH : I was referring to points which have not been answered in the Debate. I only want to say that we think these restrictions have been very severe, and we are not satisfied with the answer which we have got on the present occasion. There is no harm in pressing for sonic further reply. We only got a speech which was prepared before the Debate occurred. A matter of very great importance has been raised. No proof has been given, and in the nature of things no proof could be given, that any necessity exists for the

drastic restrictions that have been imposed. That point ought to be met, and I would like to ask my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade (Mr. Pretyman) if a Committee of this House could not be appointed to consider the question of the petrol restrictions. This is a matter of the very greatest importance and the House ought not to part with the control of it.

Another of these private Committees

has been appointed and the Government ask us to accept any drastic action that any private Committee of this kind chooses to propose. We ought not to part with the control of a matter of this kind. It touches the livelihood of hundreds of thousands—I might even say millions—of people and the convenience of the whole nation. Some means ought to be taken to prove that these very drastic restrictions are absolutely. necessary. None of us complains of the fact that the requirements of the Army And Navy come first.. We were told that they were very great, and they have got to be met, but we are not satisfied on the point. We have had one or two speeches by kusiness men in the House who are familiar with the details of this matter. I spoke to another hon. Member, perhaps the best authority in this or any other country, on this question,and I said, "I suppose you are going to take part in the Debate?" He replied, "Oh, no ! It is no use any business man talking. My advice was offered earlier in the War, and it has never been taken." We have that feeling. The advice of business men, which might help to solve the difficulty, was not sufficiently taken in this matter before the restrictions we:e imposed. The case of some tankers, which it was alleged were available, was mentioned, and my right hon. Friend at once, with that artfulness which I constantly see displayed on that bench, said, "If you can give me any particulars I will inquire into these tankers." We were completely at his mercy. I would not be foolish enough to mention a business case if I knew one, because the Treasury would fly at me again. Business matters cannot be dealt with in open debate in this House, but they could be elucidated before a Committee of this House, and there ought to be a better qualified and more_ impartial tribunal than this Committee if the House is to accept these restrictions.

The whole nation now is absolutely dependent upon motor transport, and yet we hear that a perfectly automatic rule has been applied. I have not a word to say on behalf of anybody who wastes petrol anywhere or who makes any use of it that could be avoided, but we are touching something most vital to the life and health of the people. Take the case of the City of London mentioned by my hon. Friend (Mr. Morton). There ought not to be a drastic rule, and 'they ought noteto be told that they aro only going to get 60 per cent, when the quantity they apply for as absolutely necessary. The Government ought to exhaust the business resources of the country in seeing whether the supply can be extended

before such very drastic restrictions-are imposed. I do not think the business men have beenfbrought into it at all. I should like to ask whether the Admiralty consalt the War Office about the supply they require. Is there any authority over both of them who can unify the whole of the supply of the two Departments? I understand that there is not. I understand that there is not even any consultation between the Transport Department of the Navy and the Admiral Commander-in-Chief, He is simply told, "I want so many tankers," and he must get them. I do not like to quote the example of Germany, because we have got just as good ideas and we can work things out quite as well as any German, but we-'hoar that the buying of all such things in Germany was put into the hands of one man who was over the Array, the Navy, and every other Department, who could unify the demand, and who could decide the best-Steps to be taken to exhaust the business abilities of the nation before treating the matter in a drastic manner.

At an early stage in the War the building of tankers was stopped.

It was then discovered that this was a great mistake, and tankers are now being hurried on. We asked when they would be ready, and my right lion. Friend could not tell us. I believe that SOME" of them are now ready. That question ought to be answered, and, if it cannot be answered, then a Committee ought to be set up. The agriculturist, the business man, as well as the alleged private, car owner, and all the industrial resources a the country will be tremendously hampered and great restriction will be put upon them if some intelligent action is not taken by

this House. I would like to say a word with regard to the

private car. Moat private cars are business cars. [Hon. Members : "No ! "] Yes, I venture to say they are mostly busanoss cars, and that they are mostly being used in a business -way at the present time. [Hon. Members : " No I"] I think so, the great majority of them. We have these large numbers quoted, and you invent a word, which comes, I think, from some newspaper—" joy-ride "—and then you think everybody is joy-ridiug all the time. I do not believe any large or considerable section Worth mentioniag of the people of this country are joy-riding at the present time. On the contrary, they are all influenced by patriotic motives, trying to help the Government in. every way they can, and I believe that, instead Of giving any real assistance to the great struggle in which the nation is now engaged, we shall throw difficulties in the way of the Government if something is not done.

I do not think any complaint can be made that we have had too long eDebate, because the Prime Minister said we should be into it within an hour of the beginning of the discussion, while, it did not begin until 25 minutes to 8. On this first day of the restrictions, I assure everyone in the House, there will be great interest taken outside in what is done in this matter, and it will not be long before there is evidence of public dissatisfaction. I would make two suggestions. Firstly, may I ,ask the Government to consider whether a Committee of this House cannot be appointed to which the actions of the Petrol Committee could be referred,

and which would have an opportunity of examining them and suggesting means of _increasing the-supply, and at least of giving this House an assurance that the heavy restrictions are absolutely necessary? Secondly, I do think it must be adndtted, and'perhaps the hon.Gentlernan will'be able to satisfy us on this point to-night, that the Committee have been acting in to automatic a manner. It has cut down everything, and there ought to be a sort of little Court of the Committee which would listen to hard cases, and which would go into the truth and necessity of these difficulties, and would say where an. absolute restriction should not be required. I should he very glad if some reassurance could be given to the House on' these matters and some reply made generally to the questions that

have been raised. •


comments powered by Disqus