HC Deb 23 April 1917 vol 92 cc2181-6

(1) For Sub-section (1) of Section one of the National Insurance (Part I. Amendment) Act, 1916, the following Sub-section shall be substituted:

"(1) Where, in pursuance of any Order in Council relating to pensions of officers or seamen and marines, or of any Royal Warrant relating to pennons of officers or soldiers, disabled in consequence of the present War, there has been granted, whether before or altar the passing of this Act, to any person to whom Section forty-six of the National Insurance Act, 1911, applied at the time of his leaving naval or military service, a pension in respect of disablement in the highest degree, the rate of any sickness or disablement benefit to which that person may be entitled in respect of his insurance under the National Insurance Act, 1911, shall, throughout the period in respect of which that pension, or a pension of a greater amount granted in lieu thereof, is payable, be reduced by five shillings a week, notwithstanding anything in the said Act to the contrary:

"Provided that a person to whom such a pension has been granted shall not be subject, or shall cease to be subject, to such reduction in the rate of benefit—

  1. "(i) as respects sickness benefit, if he proves that since leaving naval or military service he has been employed within the meaning of the 2182 National Insurance Act, 1911, during twenty-six weeks, whether consecutive or not, and that twenty-six weekly contributions have been paid in respect of him; and
  2. "(ii.) as respects disablement benefit, if he proves that since leaving naval or military service he has been so employed during one hundred and four weeks, whether consecutive or not, and that one hundred and four weekly contributions have been paid in respect of him.

"For the purpose of this Sub-section—

  1. "(a) an allowance in lieu of pension to a person undergoing a special course of medical treatment or undergoing treatment in an institution or receiving training in a technical institution or otherwise; and
  2. "(b) a pension in respect of total disablement suffered in consequence of the present war, granted before the first day of April, nineteen hundred and seventeen,
shall be treated as if such allowance or pension were a pension in respect of disablement in the highest degree."

(2) Where benefit at the unreduced rate has been paid for any period between the first day of April, nineteen hundred and seventeen, and the passing of this Act to a person to whom a pension in respect of disablement in the highest degree has been granted since the first-mentioned date, then the amount of the difference between benefit at the unreduced rate and at the reduced rate for such period shall be treated as an advance, and Sub-section (2) of Section one of the National Insurance (Part I. Amendment) Act, 1915, shall apply to the recovery thereof.

Question again proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

Mr. DEVLIN

I beg to move, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."

When this Bill was before the House the other night, a discussion arose owing to Members of the House being unable to interpret what the measure was about. We protested on that occasion against the absence of the Law Officers of the Crown, who should have been here to help the hon. Gentleman in charge of the Bill to steer it through the Committee. I regret that, notwithstanding that remonstrance and entirely defensible protest, we have again to-night a repetition of the absence of the Law Officers. We have the Attorney-General and Solicitor-General for England and the Attorney-General and Solicitor-General for Ireland, but, unfortunately, they are not in the House. Nor have we any Cabinet Minister present to offer some explanation; and I would like to know where these Gentlemen are. Why are they not here to simplify the proposals of the Bill and give us that essential enlightenment that would enable non-legal minds to thoroughly analyse the provisions put forward by the Government? In my view, it is unbecoming on the part of the Law Officers to be absent on this occasion, and I think it a gross insult to the House of Commons. They possibly think that they are preparing their functions in a manner that commends them to this House, since they are following the example of their chiefs in the Cabinet. To me, at all events, as a private Member, it is a monstrous condition of affairs that important Bills of a far-reaching character are introduced in the House of Commons, sometimes without explanation, and certainly without guidance from those in responsible positions. Perhaps it would be a most useful lesson, not only to members of the Cabinet, but also to highly-paid legal officers, who hold their positions to advise those of us who have not the necessary legal knowledge, if we reported Progress. It might impress them with some sense of what their duties actually are. The absence of the Law Officers is not only reprehensible, but it follows the far more reprehensible proceeding of the continued absence of Cabinet Ministers. This is not the first nor the sixth time that a protest has been offered from various parts of the House. Although we have a large army of paid Under-Secretaries and a Parliamentary Secretariat, who form, in fact, a sixth of the Members of this House, yet while private Members have to be here night after night in discharge of their duties and obligations to their constituents, those officials are conspicuous by their absence. Though I do not say that their presence would conspicuously adorn the House. I think we ought to protest against their absence, which is not only a gross insult to the House of Commons, but it takes place, not on a private Member's Bill, in which they take no interest, but on a Government Bill which comes on at ten or eleven at night, and we have not even those paid officials here to help us in deliberations which are essential not only for economic progress, but for the due prosecution of the seat. I am very sorry the Bill on which I raise this protest is a measure proposed by the hon. Baronet. [An Hon. MEMBER: "He is not a Baronet!"] I hope he soon will be a Baronet.

Sir EDWIN CORNWALL (Comptroller of the Household)

I would rather have the Bill.

Mr. DEVLIN

I hope the hon. Gentleman will not only get the baronetcy, but the Bill. I can assure him, if he brings sufficient influence to bear on the legal advisers of the Government to do their duty to the House, that the result of his colossal interest to guide this Bill through the House will, I hope, be largely recompensed, not only by a baronetcy, but that he will be able soon to become even a larger Minister in a Government which is more notorious for bustle than for business. I am eminently in favour of business—

The CHAIRMAN

I think the hon. Member is going into rather wide considerations. He is only entitled to deal with the question of the necessity of the presence of some persons for the consideration of the Bill or of Clause 1.

Mr. DEVLIN

I am not aware whether you were in the Chair when this Bill was taken on the last occasion at ten minutes to eleven o'clock. We then protested when a legal question was raised that there was no one here to answer. I ventured on that occasion to make a protest against the continuance of the discussion on this Bill until we could have legal guidance. That protest must have appeared, with all its impressiveness, in-the OFFICIAL REPORT. I take it that the Law Officers occupy some of their time in reading the OFFICIAL REPOKT, and if they did so they would have found out that such a protest was made. They knew this Bill was coming on to-night, and they are not here to assist the House in performing its duites with regard to an intricate measure which requires legal advice to enable us to come to a conclusion on it. In pursuance of the protest then made, and until those Gentlemen are here to discharge the functions for which they are highly paid, I beg to move—

The CHAIRMAN

I assume there was on the last occasion some legal point raised. As to that I must confess myself ignorant. The Question is that I do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again.

Sir E. CORNWALL

May I appeal to the House? I can understand an hon. Member raising an objection sometimes because a legal Minister is not present, but they are not necessary on this small Bill. Although the hon. Gentleman raised an objection on the last occasion because the Law Officers were not present, ho did not raise any legal objection on the last occasion, and I do not think he does so now. It is only a question of machinery here. There may be, and no doubt are, Bills on which the presence of the Law Officers is necessary for explanation, but there is no legal point of any special character in this Bill. This is a Bill to enable 2,000 approved societies in the United Kingdom to bring their machinery into line with the new Pensions Warrant which the Pensions Minister brought in, and which became operative on 1st April. It would be a serious inconvenience to the approved societies of the four countries if this Bill were delayed. I can only appeal to hon. Members to let the Bill go through. Time does not permit me to explain any of the points.

Mr. LUNDON

Why not?

Sir E. CORNWALL

I explained on Second Reading and shortly when I moved this Clause. Really there is no legal difficulty at all in the matter, and the only question before the House is that Clause 1 stand part, save for the Motion to report Progress. Beyond the fact of bringing the arrangements into conformity with the Royal Pensions Warrants there is nothing in the Clause. There is no legal difficulty about it whatever, and anybody who reads the Clause can see exactly what it means. I hope my hon. Friend, now that he has made his protest, will withdraw his Motion to report Progress and let us have this Bill to-night, not for my sake, but for the sake of the organisations which have to carry out this important work.

Mr. DEVLIN

If the hon. and gallant Member for East Down (Colonel Craig) will promise to convey my protest to the legal members of the Government, I shall be very glad to withdraw.

Motion to report Progress, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.