CORN PRODUCTION BILL. (Hansard, 10 July 1917)

§ Mr. SPEAKER

Of the Instructions on the Paper the first two, standing in the names of the hon. Members for North-West Lanark and the hon. Member for East Edinburgh, propose to divide the Bill into two parts, the first consisting of Part I. of the Bill and the rest the remainder of the Bill. It is only a short time ago that I laid down the general principles as to division of Bills, on 6th June, and I think I need not repeat the ruling which I then gave. This proposal comes clearly within the terms of that ruling and would be out of order on the ground that a clear division cannot be made, and it is impossible to cut Part I. out of the Bill and leave it standing alone. There are certain provisions in Part III. and also in the last part, which are closely connected with Part 1. Part I. could not stand alone. The second Instruction, standing in the name of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Islington (Mr. Lough)—["to strike out Part IV."]— is impossible to carry out. There is no power to strike out a portion of the Bill. If Part IV. was, as he thinks, beyond the scope of the Bill, the right hon. Member ought to have raised his objection upon the Second Beading. If there was anything improper in Part IV. being in the Bill, it has been cured by the fact that the House has read the Bill a second time. What I have said in regard to dividing Part I. from the rest of the Bill also applies to Part II., because there is a good deal in the other parts of the Bill which is connected with Part II. and Part II. could not be severed from the Bill without having to re-enact some portion of the other Clauses, for instance, in regard to the arrangement for Scotland and Ireland. In regard to the next Instruction standing in the name of the hon. Members for the Tradeston Division of Glasgow (Mr. Dundas White) and of the Leigh Division of Lancashire (Mr. Raffan) [" That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to extend relief from Income Tax under Schedule A in respect of buildings and other works for the improvement of housing, agriculture, horticulture, intensive 1760 cultivation, and the keeping of live stock "]—these are proposals which ought to find place in the Finance Bill. They are beyond the scope of this Bill. The same observation also applies to the last Instruction on the Paper, in the name of the hon. and gallant Member for New-castle-under-Lyne (Commander Wedgwood) and the hon. Member for Hagger-ston (Mr. Chancellor)—["That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to enable the Board of Agriculture and Fisheries and the corresponding Boards in Scotland and Ireland, respectively, to fix the valuation for purposes of Income Tax under Schedule A and for the purposes of local rating for twenty-one years or any less period of lands which in their opinion are not being cultivated properly."] If it is within the scope of the Bill it can be brought up as an Amendment.