HL Deb 02 July 1928 vol 71 cc791-3

Order of the day for the House to be put into Committee read.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Lord Danesfort.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly:

[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]

Clause 1 agreed to.

LORD DANESFORT moved, after Clause 1, to insert the following new clause:—

Power to refuse, cancel or suspend the registration of a person convicted of offence involving dishonesty.

"2.—(1) Where an applicant for registration under the Theatrical Employers Registration Act, 1925, or a person registered thereunder is a person who has been convicted of an offence involving dishonesty (not being an offence under the said Act), and has been sentenced therefor to penal servitude or to imprisonment without the option of a fine, the registration authority, if they consider the offence one which makes it undesirable that a person convicted thereof should be registered under the said Act, may refuse the application, or, as the case may be, cancel or suspend the registration that person:

Provided that a person whose application is so refused, or whose registration is so cancelled or suspended, may within one month after the refusal, cancellation or suspension, appeal to a court of summary jurisdiction, and the court may dismiss the appeal or make such order in the matter as the court may think just.

(2) Where the registration of a person has been cancelled or suspended under this section, the cancellation or suspension shall not take effect until the time allowed for appealing has expired, and in the event of an appeal being lodged, until the appeal has been disposed of or abandoned."

The noble Lord said: I have put this new clause on the Paper and I ask the House to assent to it. The object of it is to give the registration authorities under the Act of 1925 power to refuse registration to an applicant for registration as a theatrical employer when that person has been convicted of a serious criminal offence which involves dishonesty and, further, to give the registration authorities power to cancel or suspend the registration of such person if he has already been registered. Such a person so convicted and sentenced is obviously a person unfit to be registered as a theatrical employer, because the whole object of the Act of 1925 is to protect the interests of those employed by theatrical employers. It is somewhat singular that the Act of 1925 gave no power to the registration authorities to refuse registration to any person who applied for it, however undesirable; and, indeed, there was a case recently before the London County Council, which is the registration authority for London, in which the applicant had been convicted twice within a period of some two years of obtaining money under false pretences, and sentenced in one case to twelve months imprisonment and in another case to eighteen months imprisonment.

The position as it stands now and which this Amendment is designed to alter, is that under the Act of 1925 the registration authority has no alternative but to register a person, however undesirable. As for cancelling or suspending the registration of a person, the Act of 1925 already provides that a person who has been convicted of an offence under the 1925 Act can be brought before the Court and his registration can be cancelled or suspended, but there was given no power to anyone to cancel or suspend the registration of one who has been convicted of a criminal offence outside the Act. In these circumstances this clause has been put down. It has the support not only of the Variety Artists' Federation, which represents the actresses and actors and theatrical employees, but it also has the support of some of the principal associations of the theatrical employers and managers both in London and the provinces. It is carefully guarded so as to limit the power of the registration authorities to deal with cases of very grave offences. I should mention that where the registration authority has dealt with an undesirable person of that kind, either on receiving his application for registration or by cancelling or suspending his registration when it has been granted, there is power for the person aggrieved to appeal to a court of summary jurisdiction. I beg to move that this clause be inserted.

Amendment moved—

Clause 1, page 1, line 11, at end insert the said new clause.—(Lord Danesfort.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD DANESFORT moved, after the new clause just added, to insert the following new clause:—

Special provision for Scotland.

"3. Section one of this Act shall in its application to Scotland have effect as if the reference to the institution and prosecution of proceedings for an offence were omitted therefrom."

The noble Lord said: I propose that this new clause should be inserted in the interests of the Scottish Office. The reason is that in Scotland there is a system of public prosecution, and the Procurator Fiscal prosecutes offenders under this Act of 1925 as part of his official duties and, therefore, it is unnecessary, in the circumstances, to give this right of prosecution to the registration authorities. I beg to move.

Amendment moved—

Clause 1, page 1, line 11, at end insert the said new clause.—(Lord Danesfort.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Remaining clause agreed to.

Forward to