HC Deb 15 August 1913 vol 56 cc3095-8

"The special fund constituted under Section forty-two of the principal Act shall be known as "The Deposit Contributors Fund," and consequently references in the principal Act to the Post Office Fund shall be construed as references to the Deposit Contributors Fund."

Clause brought up, and read the first time.

Mr. MASTERMAN

I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a second time." This is a very small point, and I hope it will be accepted without discussion. The Post Office have represented to us that there is some confusion in the remoter districts between the Post Office Savings Bank Fund and the Insurance Fund, and consequently, they get Insurance books presented when they want the Savings Bank books and vice versâ, and so they have asked us to change the name of the Fund and call it "The Deposit Contributors' Fund," which indeed it is.

Question put, and agreed to.

Question, "That the Clause be added to the Bill," put, and agreed to.

Sir P. MAGNUS

Before we proceed with any more of the new Clauses, may I ask whether it would not be possible to combine the discussion on the Clauses which bear upon the same subject? Most of these new Clauses originally appeared on the Order Paper as Amendments to the particular section to which they refer. I have never quite understood why in your ruling it was necessary that they should be put down as new Clauses. It appears to me that many of them deal with the same subject and might be considered together, and unless that is done it may be said when one new Clause has been passed or rejected, that there will be no further opportunity of discussing another new Clause upon the same subject. I want to know if you can arrange, Mr. Chairman, for us to take these Clauses together.

The CHAIRMAN

I do not think the Chairman has any power to arrange the order of the new Clauses. Obviously the same rules must be applied here as in the House, otherwise individual Members would lose their place. Of course it is quite open when one Clause is being discussed and there is another on the paper later on dealing with the same subject for the hon. Member in charge of the second Amendment to point out how much preferable his form of words would be, and the Committee having both Amendments before them could say which they will have.

Mr. MASTERMAN

All these new Clauses fall into certain groups, dealing with various suggestions which have been again and again advanced. Would it be possible on a new Clause for us to take a general discussion, and any alternative proposals which the Committee might like to carry, might be carried as Amendment to the new Clause after it has been read a second time.

The CHAIRMAN

Obviously the procedure is that on the Motion, "That the Clause be read a second time," the whole principle is discussed, and on the question "That the Clause be added to the Bill" it is open to Amendment in the way the right hon. Gentleman has suggested.

Mr. BOOTH

I hope we shall follow the usual practice of the Committee, because my experience is that these innovations invariably lead to confusion. The practice of the House has been arrived at after a great deal of experience, and whenever we vary it we invariably waste time. I submit that the hon. Member has been industrious enough to get the premier position on the Order Paper, and I do not think it would be fair to mix up the discussion with five or six other subjects.

The CHAIRMAN

I do not think any deviation has been suggested from the usual course.

Mr. BOOTH

And I hope you will not permit it.

Mr. GLYN-JONES

I should like to ask whether the next new Clause to be moved by the Ion. Member for Salisbury (Mr. G. Locker-Lampson), which as I read it is to alter Section 8 of the principal Act, by inserting certain words, is in order. It seems to me quite an impossible thing to add words like those which the hon. Member proposes to Section 8 of the principal Act.

The CHAIRMAN

I admit that legislation by reference is a very undesirable way of proceeding if it can be avoided, but it is too late in this Committee to take exception to this practice.

Mr. GLYN-JONES

I know that we have amended the Act by saying that certain words should be read with it, and that certain interpretations could be put upon those words. But the wording of this new Clause is to insert in the principal Act certain words in certain places.

Dr. ADDISON

There are two or three other proposals all relating to maternity benefit, and I would like to know if under your ruling, Mr. Chairman, we can discuss the whole question of maternity benefit, or shall we have to confine our remarks to a specific point.

Mr. ALDEN

I think it would be better if we could widen the area of discussion just a little. There are many points arising under the hon. Member for Salisbury's new Clause which ought to be discussed immediately. I think the hon. Member will see the advisability of having a little wider discussion, and I hope the Chairman will be able to allow it.

Mr. MASTERMAN

For the general convenience of the Committee what I would suggest is this: There is a specific point raised in the hon. Member for Salisbury's new Clause, and it is whether maternity benefits shall be mothers' benefit or fathers' benefit, or some modification of the present relationship in connection with maternity benefit. I suggest that it would be for the convenience of the Committee that all the subjects relevant to that ques-might be dealt with in one discussion, and questions such as a midwife's certificate might be dealt with in the Clauses as they come up.

Mr. FORSTER

The right hon. Gentleman is quite right. There is another question which is that an insured woman should get the double maternity benefit instead of four weeks sick pay to which she is entitled. That does not arise on this Clause, and it would be better to deal with these different points as they come up.

The CHAIRMAN

That is the natural course unless the Committee wish any special exception to be made.