CLAUSE 1. (Increase of marimum penalty in Certain Case.) (Hansard, 9 November 1916)

§ Mr. KING
I beg to move, after the word "sub-contract" ["a sub-contract to execute any work"], to insert the words "or a proposal for a subcontract."
It is quite obvious that these words would stop up any loophole in this Clause without attempting to extend or amend the law of corruption. Here is a definite case where I think corruption might come in and might be stopped. The right hon. Gentleman will notice that it is quite obvious that corruption might begin before the contract is made. It is quite possible, in view of the legislation we are now passing, that attempts at corruption would be made on these lines, and would be outside the purview of the Act, because the contract was not actually signed or completed when the corruption occurred. The words of my Amendment would stop up that loophole. I hope they will be considered, and if they cannot be adopted here, I hope they will be considered in another place.

§ Mr. MOLTENO
I beg to second the Amendment.

§ Sir F. SMITH
If the hon. Member will read the words of the Bill a little more carefully, I think he will see that his object is attained by the measure in its present form. The relevant words are where the matter or transaction in relation to which the offence was committed was a contract or a proposal for a contract with His Majesty, or any Government Department, or any public body, or a sub-contract"… I read the word "sub-contract" as being auxiliary to the words "or a proposal." Therefore, I think my hon. Friend's object is attained.

§ Mr. BOOTH
I raised a point on the Committee stage. I want to get at the man who, while not holding a contract, or even a sub-contract, may be behind the scenes and may be financially interested. It is very often the case that a large firm nominally gets the contract, but the bulk of the work is being done by a firm which is never disclosed, except by an agreement with a small firm. What I want to be clear about is that the person behind the scenes who may be corrupt shall come under the purview of the Act.
470 He may be financially interested. Sometimes it is a moneyed man who is behind the tradesman. The actual contractor may be in too weak a financial position to get the reward of his own labour, and he may be in the hands of financial people. It has been a common thing during this War for stockbrokers' clerks and men about the City to be connected with silver-mining companies, and to go into the manufacturing districts with options, contracts, and orders for boots, clothes, and other materials, and they often say they have the backing of financial men in the City to finance a contract if some bonâ-fide manufacturing company would work with them. That does not prove my point, but it shows how varying are these transactions of people trying to get their little bit of plunder when a large amount of fresh business is suddenly thrown upon the market. If I can have some assurance that this Bill will cover the financial man behind the scenes, I shall be more satisfied. I do not think the Amendment is much more satisfactory than the Clause, but at any rate it seems to go a little bit in my direction. What I want is an assurance that the real man can be got at.

§ Sir F. SMITH
There is a difficulty in giving an assurance in any matter of legislation that the real man will be got at, and that there is no possible loophole, but I think if the hon. Member considers the wording of this Clause, he will see that it has been put in very comprehensive language. I am not quite sure that he has given special attention to the words of the first line of the Clause—
"A person convicted on indictment of a misdemeanour under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1906, or the Public Bodies Corrupt Practices Act, 1889, shall…" The hon. Member will see that there is a very considerable number of offences covered by those two Acts. I would invite his attention to the qualifying words which follow the words I have just read, any person who is convicted on indictment of a misdemeanour under either of those Acts where the matter or transaction in relation to which the offence was committed was a contract or a proposal for a contract…or a sub-contract shall be liable to the penalty. That is the true meaning of the Clause. If the hon. Member can suggest any words 471 which, without destroying the whole construction and value of the Clause, would make it more comprehensive, I would gladly consider it. But I really think that there is no corruption which comes within the class of offences with which this Bill deals that this Clause misses. I do not think the hon. Member need be apprehensive that any class of offence which is of the same family as those we propose to deal with under this Bill will escape the action of the Bill as an Act.

§ Mr. BOOTH
I am much obliged.

§ The SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. H. Samuel)
I beg to move, after the word "imprisonment"["in addition to imprisonment"], to insert the words "or prevent the infliction in lieu of penal servitude of any punishment which may be inflicted under the said Acts."
This Amendment is put down to redeem an undertaking I gave at the Committee stage. It was the desire of the Committee that it should be made clear on the face of the Act what is the intention, and what we believe to be the effect of the Act, that the sentence of three years' penal servitude is not a minimum sentence. It is only the minimum amount of penal servitude to be given. As an alternative, the penalties allowed in the earlier Acts may also be imposed when a charge is made which comes within the four corners of this Act.