§ (1) Any person guilty of an offence under this Act—
- (a) shall, if the offence is a contravention of or failure to comply with an award, be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding five pounds for each day or part of a day during which the contravention or failure to comply continues, and, if the person guilty of the offence is an employer, for each man in respect of whom the contravention or failure takes place; and
- (b) shall, if the offence is a contravention of the provisions of this Act with respect to the prevention of lock-outs, be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding five pounds, in respect of each man locked out, for each day or part of a day during which the contravention continues; and
- (c) shall, if the offence is a contravention of the provisions of this Act with respect to the prohibition of strikes, be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding five pounds for each day or part of a day during which the contravention continues; and
- (d) shall, if the offence is a contravention of or failure to comply with any regulations in a controlled establishment or any undertaking given by a workman under Part II. of this Act, be liable in respect of each offence to a fine not exceeding three pounds; and
- (e) shall, if the offence is a contravention of or failure to comply with any other provisions of this Act, be liable in respect of each offence on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding fifty pounds.
§ (2) A fine for any offence, being a contravention of or failure to comply with any regulations in a controlled establishment or any undertaking given by a workman under Part II. of this Act, shall be recoverable only before the Munitions Tribunal established for the purpose under this Act.
§ Mr. LOUGHI beg to move, in Subsection (1) (a), to leave out the words "on summary conviction" ["be liable on summary conviction to a fine"].
I think there is an Amendment to deal with this matter of summary conviction. This Clause deals with penalties.
§ The CHAIRMANWill the right hon. Gentleman excuse me: there is a manuscript Amendment handed in by the hon. Member for Gorton (Mr. Hodge).
Mr. T. WILSONOn behaf of my hon. Friend I beg to move, in Sub-section (1) (a), to leave out the word "summary."
We do not wish Police Court jurisdiction called into operation in connection with the Act. We understand that the Munitions Tribunal will deal with these cases.
§ The CHAIRMANI have just received a list of Government manuscript Amendments dealing with this point. It will perhaps save the Committee a good deal of trouble if I inform them what these Amendments are. They seem to cover all the Amendments on this Clause.
§ The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of EDUCATION (Mr. Arthur Henderson)I beg to move, in Sub-section (1), paragraph (a), to leave out the words "on summary conviction."
The Government desire, as far as possible, on this Clause to follow the suggestions made by the hon. and learned Member for Exeter (Mr. Duke), and to have all these cases dealt with under what he describes as a "domestic court." The punishments set out in the several Sec- 2078 tions will remain exactly the same, but it is felt that the workers' objection would be very much softened down if he could feel that all the cases arising out of the several Sections were dealt with by the class of person whom we had already attempted to provide for the Munitions Court already in the Bill. We propose, therefore, to move a series of Amendments giving effect to this object. We propose to take out the words "on summary conviction" in four different places where they now appear, and we are going to set up, not one Munitions Court, but two. The Munitions Court that is already in the Bill will remain. That Munitions Court will only deal with a certain limited number of cases. We propose to set up another Munitions Court, and that Court will have power to deal with all cases of offences arising under the various Sections of the Act. We propose to take out the words "on summary conviction," not only from paragraph (a), but also from paragraphs (b), (c), and (e). In Sub-section (2) we propose to delete from the word "being" to the word "Act" ["Part II. of this Act"], and to insert words which will make the Section read, "A fine for any offence under this Act shall be recoverable only before the Munitions Tribunal established for the purpose under this Act." Then, at the end of the first paragraph of Clause 14, we propose to insert the following words: "And the Minister of Munitions may constitute two classes of Munitions Tribunals, the first class having jurisdiction to deal with all offences under this Act, the second class having jurisdiction to deal only with any contravention of or failure to comply with any regulation made applicable to a controlled establishment, or any undertaking given publicly by a workman under Part II. of this Act," Then, in Sub-section (3), after the word "tribunals," we propose to add the words "or either class of Munition Tribunals;" and the next Amendment is in Sub-section (4), after the word "tribunal" ["by a Munitions Tribunal"], to insert the words "for any offence within the jurisdiction of a tribunal of the second class." We feel quite satisfied that we are giving effect to the appeal that was made by the hon. and learned Member for Exeter, and I think that this will find acceptance among my hon. Friends, because, though we leave the punishment the same we take all the cases right away from the Police Court, and that I understood to be the strong desire of my hon. Friends 2079 below the Gangway. As this was a sort of experiment and temporary measure we desire not to have the men taken before the magistrates and to feel possibly that they were not getting their cases considered always by men of a more sympathetic nature as they are now, if we have these two sets of Munitions Tribunals set up.
§ Mr. G. TERRELLWill these tribunals set in private, or will they be open to the public, and the proceedings publicly reported?
§ Mr. J. SAMUELWill those two Courts be in the same district and composed of the same men, or two sets of men?
§ Mr. DUKEI am very glad His Majesty's Government have seen their way to have these local tribunals, both with regard to the raising of these delicate questions in Justice Courts, and with regard to the question of the mode in which we shall organise what you may call the disciplinary part of the Bill. As I understand what the right hon. Gentleman has said, you will have for the factories and workshops what will be practically domestic tribunals. It would be a great advantage in these matters, which ought to be little matters, and dealt with almost day by day, to have domestic rules for them. I cannot see any objection to the Amendment. It is also proposed to deal on a systematic plan with the whole of the administration throughout the country. It will not deal with questions of management in factories, but will deal with the relations of class to class—the class of employers to the class of workmen, and apply the whole scheme harmoniously throughout the country. I agree with the principle of what has been said, that the people to have the control of domestic affairs probably would not be best fitted to exercise the general supervision over what is going on in a large business. If you take Sheffield, Birmingham, or Tyneside, or any place where armaments are being provided, you might have in a limited area a little local board which would command the confidence of everybody, the members of it being well known. In a large district, like the whole of Tyneside, you may have very serious questions quite apart from discipline in factories, and you will want men who will command general respect in the district to man the Courts in the larger area. The 2080 difficulties which I foresaw in the working of the machinery of the Bill in factories have, I think, been removed.
§ Mr. A. HENDERSONIt is not the intention of the Minister of Munitions that the Courts shall sit in private. In answer to my hon. Friend (Mr. Jonathan Samuel), I should state that in the second class of Courts there will be a larger number than in the first class. Where we set up a first Court we do not intend to set up a second Court in the same district.
§ Mr. J. SAMUELIs it possible to provide for strikes, lock-outs, and matters of that kind?
§ 11.0 P.M.
§ Mr. A. HENDERSONThe first Court will try every case, large and small. Hence we do not propose to set up the second class of Court in the area where the first class of Court has been established, because we think that that Court can do the whole of the work. There will probably be only ten or a dozen of these Courts, but there may be sixty or seventy of the second class.
§ Mr. G. TERRELLI understand that each Court will have no power of imprisonment in default of payment of fines, but simply the power of fining.
§ Mr. A. HENDERSONThe small Court will have no power to do other than impose a fine, the maximum of which is fixed at £3. The other Court will have power to punish as is set out in the Bill, only it will be what we call a Domestic Court and not a Police Court.
Mr. T. WILSONWe are very glad the Government have introduced these Amendments. We believe that the Bill as amended will inspire a great deal more confidence in the minds of the workpeople than otherwise it would have done, and at the same time remove a considerable amount of bad feeling in connection with the administration of the Act. Therefore, so far as we are concerned, we are satisfied, except as to one point about which probably the Minister of Munitions may accept a new Clause.
§ Mr. ANDERSONI regard these Amendments as a very distinct improvement. These offences are emergency offences, and the less there is of taking them before the magistrates the better. My own view is that if you had much of that you would create difficulties instead of getting rid of 2081 them, and very often would arouse the bitterest feeling inside the factories. In the larger Court is there the right of imprisonment.
§ Mr. A. HENDERSONThe power of imprisonment set out in the Clause remains in the larger Court, but we thought we were giving the workman the advantage by giving him a more sympathetic or Domestic Court.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Consequential Amendments, leaving out the words "on summary conviction," agreed to.
§ Mr. HODGEWe would like the Minister of Munitions to accept an Amendment as to the penalty for making a false statement or in connection with the wearing of a badge.
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEThat has been left out.
§ The CHAIRMANWe left out the words about wearing the badge in Clause 11.
§ Further Amendment made: In Subsection (2), to leave out the words "being a contravention of or failure to comply with any regulations in a controlled establishment or any undertaking given by a workman under Part II. of this Act," and insert instead thereof the words "under this Act."—[Mr. Lloyd George.]
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
§ Mr. R. MACDONALDI am sorry that I did not notice that you had overlooked an Amendment which I had handed in. I merely raise the point now in the form of a question, and ask whether in this series of penalties any penalty is included for a breach of Clause 4, Sub-section (4)?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEAn Amendment covering that particular case has already been inserted at the instance of an hon. Friend below the Gangway.
§ Mr. R. MACDONALDI understand that an Amendment which you are to move later on, carrying on Part I., for the purpose of enforcing this, will be read in with the penalties?
§ Mr. LLOYD GEORGEYes.
§ Mr. J. SAMUELOn the Second Reading the Home Secretary said that he would consider a point I then raised, 2082 namely, whether these fines could be imposed without the intervention of the Act of 1896?
§ Sir J. SIMONI know my hon. Friend takes a close interest in that branch of the law, and has played a very important part in it. The Truck Act is concerned only with attempts made by agreement between employers and workmen to deduct fines from wages. This has nothing to do with agreements between employers and workmen, but with fines imposed by a tribunal, and we provide that those fines can be deducted from wages.
§ Question put, and agreed to.