§ "Where the executive body of a society show to the satisfaction of the Commissioners that it is of importance to the society that the rules of the society should be amended or varied immediately, but that, owing to the requirements of the rules the amendments or variation cannot be made without delay or without the authority of a meeting of the society or some committee or delegate body, and that that meeting cannot be held without undue delay or expense, the Commissioners may, on the application to the executive body, authorise the variation or amendment to come into force immediately, and continue in force until the delay required has elapsed, or until the time at which the meeting would in ordinary course have been held."
§ Clause brought up, and read the first time.
§ Mr. MASTERMANI beg to move, "That the Clause be read a second time."
I understand that this Clause is desired in the interests of friendly societies and trade unions. It is meeting a case where there would be great expenses on them. 3436 It is to give them the right provisionally to modify their rules before they hold the general meeting until that general meeting accepts that provisional modification. It is carefully limited and safeguarded. It has to be shown to the satisfaction of the Commissioners that it is of importance that the rules of the society should be amended or varied immediately and that it should be done without delay and that the meeting could not be held without undue delay or expense. Its object is to enable them without holding a general meeting, which in some cases would cost hundreds of pounds, to change the rules. In this particular Bill there are provisions which will require new rules. In the case of maternity benefits, for instance, it prescribes that the woman shall not work during the four weeks' interval. I think the societies are very anxious for this Clause. I am guided by those who speak for the approved societies, and I understand they are anxious to make these provisional rules during the waiting period, instead of having to call a special meeting, which would cost many of the societies a good deal of money.
§ Mr. G. LOCKER-LAMPSONI should like to point out that if this Clause goes through it will really render nugatory the lines on which the original Act proceeded in regard to the conditions of approval. Section 23, Sub-section (2), paragraph (2), says that the constitution of an approved society must provide to the satisfaction of the Insurance Commissioners "for its affairs being subject to the absolute control of its members being insured." If you are going to enable the Commissioners to take certain action without the insured persons being consulted, you are taking the control of the society out of the hands of the members. At the same time this Clause is running directly contrary to the provisions in the Act that the constitution and affairs of the society shall be within the control of the members. I dare say the right hon. Gentleman has some explanation.
§ Mr. HARRY LAWSONNo doubt there is substance in the point just made by my hon. Friend, but from my very long experience of the Hearts of Oak Society, I believe this Amendment ought to be passed. Under the conditions imposed by this Bill great difficulty and cost might be caused if there were not some power of this kind. We ought to see that it is made absolutely clear that it is only provisional. The approval of the Commis- 3437 sioners must be obtained. Looking at the difficulty and expense that the absence of such a provision would cause I hope it will be carried.
§ Mr. BOOTHI shall support this Clause if the Amendment of which I have given notice is incorporated with it, which I think only makes it more certain to serve its purpose.
§ The CHAIRMANI had better read the Amendment. It is to add the words, "and where the rules require the sanction of a special general meeting the Commissioners may authorise the substitution of the sanction of an annual general meeting."
§ Mr. BOOTHThe object of that is that where an annual general meeting is about to take place, all this being subject to the Commissioners, the Commissioners should "have power to recognise that meeting instead of holding a special general meeting as well.
§ Mr. HARRY LAWSONWhat notice should be given?
§ Mr. BOOTHThat is under the control of the Commissioners. If proper notice had not been given they would not recognise such a method. I would prefer—although I suppose it is not legal, still it is what in ordinary business would have been done—that we should simply legalise any alteration in the rules consequent on the passing of this Bill. There are several of the Clauses which require that the approved societies shall make rules and the simplest way would have been to allow all such rules to be sanctioned. It is with a view to carrying that out that I think the Commissioners ought to be able to recognise an annual meeting, instead of holding a special meeting.
§ Mr. FORSTERWe ought to be very careful about authorising anybody to alter the rules of the society without the sanction and support of the members. I am a good deal impressed with what has been said of the necessities for a large alteration of the rules of practically all the approved societies, in consequence of the passing of this Bill. We do not want to throw any pecuniary burden upon the funds of societies which we can avoid, and it may be that it is essential to give the Commissioners power to sanction certain alterations in the rules of the societies for the purpose of carrying out the alterations 3438 contained in this Bill, but I think we ought to limit it. We ought to limit it to the alterations which may be made in the rules which are necessitated by the passing of this Act. I want to instance the case where we ought not to authorise any change in the rules without the assent of the members. Recently the Commissioners issued a Circular No. 97, pointing out that some societies have not taken power in their rules to provide for the remuneration of executive officers, and they suggested that steps should be taken to regularise the payment of remuneration to executive officers at the earliest possible moment. I do not think we ought to allow any officers of these societies to change the rules and vote themselves remuneration without the sanction of the members of their society having been previously obtained. I do not know if what I have said has influenced the Committee in any way; I think we ought to limit the power to those cases which are necessitated by the passing of the Bill.
§ Mr. THOMASI rise to ask the right hon. Gentleman to accept the addition suggested by the hon. Member for Pontefract (Mr. Booth). I agree with hon. Members who want to prevent any interference with the power of the members themselves to determine their own situation, but I think it will be recognised that if this Bill is to become an operative Act some time in October many of these societies will hold their meetings before October, and consequently will not have another meeting until October, 1914. To spend four or five hundred pounds in calling a special delegate meeting simply to alter the rules to give effect to this Act would be absurd in the extreme. For that reason I hope the Clause will be accepted.
Mr. BATHURSTI am bound to say I do not like this Clause at all. It is nothing but a bureaucracy, and is entirely contrary the democratic system upon which our whole friendly society government has been founded. The suggestion has been made that this Amendment has the approval of the friendly societies generally. I have reason to believe that it does meet with the approval of the industrial provident societies and some trades unions, but I was really surprised to hear the Member for Mile End (Mr. Harry Lawson) speak of the Hearts of Oak.
§ Mr. HARRY LAWSONI did not say or mean that it had their approval; I only spoke of my own experience in the society.
Mr. BATHURSTI have reason to believe that the Hearts of Oak Society do not approve of it at all. The Manchester Unity do not approve of it; none of the old friendly societies approve of it. I venture to suggest that there is not sufficient urgency and substance in the claim of the hon. Gentleman to render it necessary to pass this Clause. If it is passed do not let any money be applied under it. Let it be limited to matters connected with the bringing into operation of the Insurance Act.
§ Mr. J. SAMUELSimply the Amending Act?
Mr. BATHURSTYes, but let no money pass, otherwise you are taking power out of the hands of the societies which have been created on a purely popular and democratic basis and giving officers much larger power than members ever intended them to have. I am quite sure that members do not desire to do that. Hon. Members should face the fact that the old friendly societies do not approve of this Clause.
§ The CHAIRMANMay I suggest that the Committee should take the Second Reading, and discuss the points dealing with the Amendments afterwards?
§ The CHAIRMANThe hon. Member can speak on the Amendments or on the Motion that the Amended Clause form part of the Bill.
§ Mr. MASTERMANAs a statement made by me may have an influence as to whether or not the Clause is read a second time, perhaps I might make a suggestion. I suggest that this might be a purely temporary measure. The great difficulty is that if October is passed they would have to call a general meeting of members for an alteration of the rules at the cost of several hundreds of pounds or else leave the matter over for a year's time. Under no circumstances, however, need an executive body act like this. I do not see how the executives of the societies need object. They need not use it. I should have thought there would hardly be time to ascertain the views of all the 3440 members upon it. It is not a Government matter. I am only trying to do it for the convenience of the societies. I submit this Section should not continue in. force after the 31st day of December, 1914.
§ The CHAIRMANI think it would be for the general convenience if we discuss these points of detail on the Section. The general feeling seems to be that the Clause should be read a second time.
Mr. HALLI am opposed to the reading of this Clause. If the right hon. Gentle man will bring it to the 31st December, 1914, it might meet me. It seems to me to be taking away the fundamental principle of industrial insurance altogether. There is a Clause in the Friendly Societies Act which reads, "no rule shall be amended, altered or rescinded unless with the consent of the majority of the members present at a meeting specially called for that purpose, due notice of such alteration having been given as to the date of such meeting, and no amendment of rule is valid unless registered." Surely, Sir, that is a most important point. The whole of these matters were considered when the Friendly Societies Act was passed, and we ought not this afternoon to be called upon to deal with the whole question in regard to them. I appreciate that there are difficulties, and I am one of the last to desire that there should be any needless waste of money in. calling the people together. If you amp going to limit it to the 31st December, 1913, I should agree to it. If, on the other hand, you are to take any later date I shall vote against it.
§ The CHAIRMANThe hon. Member will have an opportunity of voting when the Question is put, that it be added to the Bill.
§ Mr. J. SAMUELI only want to make one point arising out of the suggestion made by the right hon. Gentleman the Financial Secretary. I make it now because I think he may not press it. He does not touch the point which was raised by the hon. Member for Sevenoaks, which I think is the best solution, namely, to limit the alteration of the rules to anything that arises out of the Amending Act. Now, if you limited by time—that is to say up to next October—and if the Commissioners under this Clause authorised an executive to vary the rules, the rules would come into operation immediately. That does not meet what is wanted. The executive committee in that case could 3441 alter the rules of the society without the knowledge of the members of the approved society, and a great injustice might thereby be done. I think if the right hon. Gentleman will accept the principle which has been suggested by the hon. Member for Sevenoaks, and which I think is a practical solution that would be acceptable.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ Clause added to the Bill.
§ Mr. MASTERMANI have an Amendment on the Table to add words at the end of the Clause. I should have been glad if they had come earlier.
§ Question proposed, "That, after the word 'Amendment,' the words 'rendered necessary by the passing of this Act.'"
§ Mr. FORSTERIf that is agreed, I shall not say another word.
§ Question, "That these words be there inserted," put, and agreed to.
§ Mr. BOOTHI beg to move, at the end of the proposed Clause to add the words "and where the rules require the sanction of a special general meeting, the Commissioners may authorise the substitution of the sanction of the annual general meeting."
§ Mr. CASSELBefore these words are added, I think we ought to have a little explanation.
§ Mr. BOOTHIt is a very simple point giving power to the Commissioners, when an annual general meeting has recently taken place, to do this instead of calling a special general meeting, perhaps immediately after, at great cost.
§ Question, "That those words be there added," put, and agreed to.
§ Clause added to the Bill.