§ The Admiralty, the Army Council, and the Air Council, either directly or through officers appointed by them, shall in the prescribed manner furnish to the registration officers in the several constituencies such information as to the names and addresses of naval and military voters and such other particulars as may be necessary for the purpose of their registration and of their voting as such, and it shall be the duty of the Local Government Board to render any assistance that may be required by the Admiralty, the Army Council, and the Air Council in conveying such information to the registration officers:
§ Provided that the Admiralty, Army Council, and Air Council shall not be required to supply any particulars which in their declared opinion would interfere with the proper conduct of the War.
§ Lords Amendment read a second time.
§ Sir G. CAVEI beg to move, as an Amendment to the Lords Amendment, to leave out the word "and" ["and the Air Council"], and to insert after the words "Air Council" the words "and the Board of Trade."
The intention of the Lords was that this new Rule should take the place of Rule 17. For myself, I think that reliance might very well be placed on the naval and military authorities, who have been most anxious to give all information, but, if it is desired, to specify in more detail the information which may be asked for, I have no objection.
§ Amendment to the lords Amendment agreed to.
§ Lords Amendments, as amended (with further drafting Amendment), agreed to.
1978§ Lords Amendments:
§ In Rule 16, after the word "and" ["and shall cause"], insert the words "as soon as practicable."—Agreed to.
§ Leave out Rule 17.—Agreed to.
§ In Rule 21, after the word "dead," insert the words "or subject to any legal incapacity."
§ Sir G. CAVEI beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
Mr. HEALYThe question of notice arises on this. It would be only fair that the person whose name is to be struck off should get notice.
§ Sir G. CAVEThat point is met by Rule 23.
§ Mr. WHITEHOUSEI am doubtful whether that quite covers the point, because, taking the words which precede the Amendment, "expunging the names of persons who are dead," this would follow the same procedure.
§ Sir G. CAVEindicated dissent.
§ Lords Amendment agreed to.
§ Lords Amendment:
§ In Rule 21, after the word "constituency," insert the words,
§ "or as a local government elector in. respect of more than one qualification—
- (a) in the same borough for the purpose of borough council elections; or,
- (b) in the same electoral division or ward for the purpose of county council, metropolitan borough council, and urban district council elections; or,
- (c) in the same parish or ward of a. parish for the purpose of rural district council, guardians, or parish. elections."—Agreed to.
§ In Rule 22, after the word "of" ["rest of voters"], insert the word. "Parliamentary."—Agreed to.
§ Leave out the word "parish," and insert the words "registration unit"—Agreed to.
§ After the word "constituency," insert the words "or district of boroughs."—Agreed to.
§ Leave out the words "to be registered"-["to be registered to vote"].—Agreed to.
§ Leave out the words "any person not registered," and insert the words "any such persons."—Agreed to.
1979§ In Rule 24, after the word "register," insert the words "with a separate letter and a separate series of numbers for each polling district."—Agreed to.
§ In Rule 29, at end of first paragraph, insert the words "any document required to be published shall be kept published for the prescribed time.''—Agreed to.
§ In Rule 32, leave out "register" and insert "lists."—Agreed to.
§ At the end of Rule 33, insert the words "any notice requiring information under this rule may be sent by post."—Agreed to.
§ After the words last inserted, add as a New Rule,
§ "34. The Local Government Board shall collect from the naval and military and air force authorities, the tribunals established for the purpose of the Military Service Act, 1916, and other available sources such information, as it is reasonably practicable to obtain, with reference to persons disqualified on account of conscientious objection to military service from being registered and voting under this Act, and shall place any information so collected at the disposal of registration officers by whom inspection thereof shall be given under the same conditions that govern the register."
§ Mr. MORRELLI beg to move, "That this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
I think that this Amendment violates the spirit of the pledges that were given at the time the disqualification of conscientious objectors was inserted. We were assured again and again by the Government when they inserted these disqualifying Clauses that it was not for any purposes of penalising these men, and that there was no penalty intended. We were told that they are disqualified simply because they were unfit to exercise the vote. It is very questionable, indeed, whether it would have been in order to penalise them, but this Amendment introduced by the Lords is of a directly penalising character. It instructs the Local Government Board to prepare a kind of black list of conscientious objectors and to send it down to the local registration officer in order that it may be posted on the doors of churches and chapels and other public places for everyone to look at. So far as I can see this black list will apply, not merely to the men who are legally disqualified, but it will include those who are or may be disqualified if they fail to prove 1980 that they have done work of national importance. This is a very important point, because you may be unfairly stigmatising men who, after all, are entitled to vote. As this Bill is now drawn, any person being a conscientious objector may be disqualified during the continuance of the War and for a certain period thereafter, unless at the expiration of one year after the War he proves certain things to a tribunal specially established for that purpose. This Clause will involve the posting up not only of the names of all people who are disqualified, but also the names of those who have done National Service and whom it is not intended to disqualify. They will all be posted up by the local registration officer, and when a man sees himself thus posted he will have to go to the Central Tribunal within a year after the termination of the War and try to prove that he has done certain work of national importance. That is a most objectionable and most unfair proceeding, and it is entirely contrary to the spirit of the pledges given when these disqualifying Clauses were being passed through Parliament.
Personally, I cannot see why any provision of this sort is necessary. Why should you wish to deal with men who are disqualified because they are conscientious objectors differently from the method in which you treat those disqualified for other reasons These men will be known locally: the local registration officer would know all about them. Why, then, put the Local Government Board to the expense and trouble of preparing special lists and sending them down to the local registration officer? This is a costly and most unfair policy, and I sincerely hope that the Government, in the interests of fair play to these men, will not insist on agreeing with this Amendment from the other House. Why thus brand men who stand up for conscience? Is it worth while having a Clause of this sort? Public feeling as regards these men to-day is very different from what it was a little while ago. At the recent Labour conference at Nottingham. at which certain members of the Government were present, a resolution was passed demanding the immediate release of conscientious objectors. I cannot believe it is in the public interest that you should attempt to penalise these men further than you have already done. To blacken away a man's name is a serious matter. It is a more serious matter to put him on a black list, which will certainly be 1981 regarded with great disfavour by certain sections of the community, when that man may still be entitled to his vote. I ask the House to disagree with this Amendment.
§ Mr. WHITEHOUSEI agree with all that has been said by my hon. Friend (Mr. Morrell) in moving that the House disagree with this Amendment. It would be entirely impossible to carry it out in any fair way. It directs the military authorities, the air forces authorities, and the naval authorities, amongst others, to prepare lists of persons who are conscientious objectors. The military authorities will have records of courts-martial on conscientious objectors, and, presumably, will be able to supply the names of men who, on these grounds, came under discipline. But they would have no knowledge whatever of those conscientious objectors who, although they have come under discipline, are qualified to exercise the franchise in accordance with provisions which have already been incorporated in this Bill. Therefore all the authorities can do is to supply a list of conscientious objectors, but not a list of those who, nevertheless, under the conditions inserted in the Bill, are legally qualified to exercise the franchise. My first objection to the Clause is that it is perfectly unworkable in this respect. How, then, can it operate? The effect will be that there will be printed and published all over the country lists which will be accessible to public reference in precisely the same way that the ordinary registration lists are accessible to men who are held to be disqualified from voting, although many of them will be qualified legally to exercise the vote, and a disqualification which does not exist will consequently be imposed upon them by inference. The Clause will also give rise to very great injustice. But there is another reason, which is even more important, why the House should disagree with this Amendment, and it is based upon the ground of public policy. No one can desire at the end of this War to prepare a kind of black list of some of the most highly respected and honoured citizens of this country, highly respected and honoured before the War and who will be highly respected and honoured after the War—
§ Sir C. HENRYBy whom?
§ Mr. WHITEHOUSEI, for one, at the present time highly respect and honour them. To make a black list of these citizens is contrary to public policy, and 1982 it can only have one result. It will incite the kind of petty passion and prejudice which we all know it is so easy to create against men who have taken an unpopular stand during the War.
The decision which has been arrived at with regard to conscientious objectors is simply this. A voter who is a conscientious objector has to obtain from the appropriate tribunal a certificate to show that he has complied with the provisions set forth in the Act relating to their qualifications to that Section of the Act which relates to the qualifications they must have before they can vote. The arrangement, however unjust it may be—and I think it is a very unjust and improper arrangement to find a place in this Bill at all—is at least a clear arrangement and a definite plan, and those who are conscientious objectors know precisely under the Bill as it now stands what they have to do in order to secure a qualification to exercise the franchise. This new Clause entirely upsets that arrangement and brings a new and most disturbing element into the matter. It would not only operate unjustly to a large body of citizens, but it would also be contrary to the public interest and public good, and I sincerely trust that the Government will offer no objection to the Motion that has been made.
Mr. FISHERI am not sorry that the Motion has been made to disagree with the Lords in this Amendment, and while I am willing to accept that Motion I differ entirely from the Mover and Seconder of the Motion, both in regard to their opinions of the conscientious objector who, they seem to think, ought to be placed on a special roll of honour—
Mr. FISHER—for their deeds, or, rather, want of deeds, in the present War—I should hold a very different opinion myself—and in regard to their references to the Local Government Board. After all, I do not think there is the slightest foundation for saying that the Local Government Board, either here or in Scotland, are in the least likely to lend themselves to place any class of men on a black list, or in any way to persecute any men who, by the Rules of this House, are to be penalised as regards the vote. I am, therefore, sorry that the Mover of the Motion suggested that the Local 1983 Government Board will lend itself to anything in the nature of persecution or placing conscientious objectors on the black list merely because the Local Government Board has been asked under this Amendment to ascertain all the available information as regards the conscientious objectors for the sole purpose of providing the registration officer with information in order that he may make his list correct as regards conscientious objectors. The reason I am glad the Motion has been made to disagree with the Lords in this Amendment is that, as President of the Local Government Board, I have scrutinised the Amendment very carefully. I believe that the labour placed on the Local Government Board by this Amendment would be extraordinary, that it would result. in an immense amount of labour, posting, and printing, and that for all that you would get little or no value. After all, if we are to try to ascertain all the information—though I quite admit that the Amendment limits it to what it is reasonably practicable to obtain—about some thousands of conscientious objectors by applying to the War Office. the Admiralty, the Air Board, then to the 1,800 tribunals in the country—
§ 2.0 P.M.
Mr. FISHER—and then, having obtained that information, we are to sort it out, segregate it, and collate it, and send these lists down to all the registration officers throughout the country, by the time it reaches them I should like to know what good it will he to them with regard to the particular register they have to make up. It is because of that practical objection to this Amendment that I am glad the Motion to disagree with it has been moved, and not because of the suggestion that the Local Government Board would lend itself in any way to persecute or put these men on a black list.
Mr. T. WILSONI am glad the Government have accepted this Motion. I agree with the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Fisher) that if the Amendment had been accepted it would have been like using a hundred-ton gun to shoot sparrows with. I would like to say, further, that. the Government would be well-advised to avoid any irritating resolu- 1984 tions at all so far as labour is concerned. As has been said, the Labour Conference at Nottingham last week carried with acclamation a resolution with regard to conscientious objectors, and I am quite sure that if the Government accepted Clauses like this in their Bill they would simply supply the agitators with ammunition to use against the Government, I certainly do not agree with the attitude taken up by the conscientious objectors in connection with the War. I absolutely disagree with them, but I believe by introducing Amendments like this you are simply magnifying the importance of the conscientious objector. The chief objection that I, like the right hon. Gentleman, have to this Amendment is that it will increase the work of his Department, and will throw an enormous amount of labour on the Army and naval authorities as well, while, adding expense to the country in administering the Act.
§ Mr. KINGI should like to say that I am very pleased that this decision has. been taken by the Local Government Board. We might have saved time if inquiries that were instituted had not pointed to the fact that the Government were likely to accept this Amendment. We were told privately that that was so.
Mr. FISHERI must say that there was no foundation whatever for that. Lobby gossip, as the hon. Gentleman knows, is very often unfounded.
§ Mr. KINGThat gives me very great pleasure indeed. I am very glad to be misinformed in a way which is unpleasant to myself and to others. I entirely withdraw any implication. I was wrongly informed, and if others had not been wrongly informal we should have got on more rapidly
§ Lords Amendment disagreed with. Lords Amendments:
§ After Rule 35, insert as a new Rule,
§ "36. Where for the purpose of the provisions of this Act any person requires a certificate of birth, that person shall, on presenting a written requisition in the prescribed form and containing the prescribed particulars, and on payment of a fee of 6d., be entitled to obtain a certified copy of any entry of the birth 1985 of that person in the birth register under the hand of the registrar or the superintendent registrar having the custody thereof, and forms of requisition for the purpose shall on application be supplied without charge by every registrar of births and deaths and by every superintendent registrar."—Agreed to.
§ After Rule 38, insert as a new Rule,
§ "39. In reckoning time for the purpose of these Rules, Sunday, Christmas Day, Good Friday, and any Bank Holiday or day set apart as a public holiday, or day of public fast, or public thanksgiving shall be excluded; and where anything is required by these Rules to be done on any day falls to be done on any such day, that thing may be done on the next day not being one of any such days."—Agreed to.