HC Deb 22 January 1918 vol 101 cc904-7

(1) Any person who on the fifteenth day of February, nineteen hundred and eighteen, has in his employment any male person between the ages of fifteen and sixty-five who was required to register himself under the principal Act or is liable by virtue of this Act so to register himself, or on or after that date takes into his employment any such male person shall, within seven days after that date, or immediately on taking the male person into his employment, as the case may be, require him to produce his certificate of registration, and if any such male person does not produce his certificate of registration to the employer within a period of seven days after being so required, the employer shall on the expiration of the said period send to the local registration authority in whose district that person is resident notice that that person has so failed to produce his certificate of registration.

(2) If any person taking info or having in his employment any such male person as aforesaid fails to comply with the requirements of this Section he shall for each offence be liable, on conviction under the Summary Jurisdiction Acts, to a fine not exceeding five pounds.

Mr. FISHER

I beg to move, in Subsection (1), to leave out the words "immediately on," and to insert instead thereof the word "after." The object of this Amendment is to enable the employer to take advantage of his having to employ a good many men to unload a ship or carry out similar. work that requires a large amount of additional labour for two or three days. This leaves seven days after taking a male person in his employ, and within seven days he must require him to produce his certificate. If such person does not continue in his employment he will not necessarily be called upon to produce his certificate. This proposal is simply to allow an employer to take on temporary labour without inconvenience.

Mr. KING

I think this is quite a good Amendment, and meets the point I have in view. I would like to ask, however, if it really meets the practical difficulty of men who come for short time employment being required to produce their certificates, report change of employment, and all the rest of it. Could not a more simple provision be put in to the effect that where an engagement was for less than a fortnight this arrangement should not apply?

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. KING

I beg to move, in Subsection (2), to leave out- the words "five pounds" and to insert. instead thereof the words "one pound."

This is a very small offence concerning a man having a person in his employment, and not complying with this Section. I think one pound is quite enough fine, especially as it may fall upon small agricultural employers and men of limited education. There are a great many small employers of labour who are uneducated men possessing a very imperfect knowledge of what-is going on in public affairs or of the relations prevailing elsewhere. Take, for example, small farmers in remote districts, or small tradesmen in out-of-the way places. These are just the class of persons who are very likely to omit to perform the duties imposed by this Section, and I suggest that £1 is quite enough as a penalty, because £5 in such cases is very likely to be ruinous.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

I think the right hon. Gentleman will agree that this Clause will have to be reconsidered when he arranges what words he is going to introduce into the Bill to prevent these penalties falling upon young persons under this measure. It may well be that a young man of seventeen and a-half years of age may have in his employment other persons who are subject to registration, and Le may omit to carry out the provisions of this Act. Whatever words the right hon. Gentleman decides upon will have to have reference to this Sub-section of the Clause in order to meet certain cases where you have youthful employers. I do not ask the right hon. Gentleman to deal with this point now, but I ask him to bear it in mind at a later stage.

Mr. FISHER

I think it will be a very rare case indeed of a young person of seventeen and a-half years of age having a number of people working under him. I did promise to look into the question of the penalty, but as the penalty of the principal Act is a sum not exceeding £5 I think it would probably be better to keep the same penalty under this Act. Several hon. Members have rather harped on this £5 penalty, but let me point out that that is the maximum, and it is not one which any Court is likely to impose except for a very serious offence. When we make the maximum £5 we do not expect it to be imposed in cases of a mild nature which could probably be met by a penalty of a few shillings. There is always a certain amount of elasticity in regard to a penalty of this kind, and we trust to the discretion of the magistrates to be merciful towards people who, without any knowledge, have, perhaps, committed only a nominal offence under the Act as it stands.

Mr. KING

I do not think that this case can be met simply by saying that £5 is the maximum penalty, and that hardly any magistrates will ever impose it. That is not at all my experience. My experience is that the inequalities of fines at the present time are worse than ever. There are a great many benches of magistrates who now always out on the maximum fine, because they think the country is short of money, and that this is one way of raising money for the War. There are magistrates who are so ignorant and prejudiced that they will always impose the maximum fine in cases like this. There are others who are so tender-hearted that they will hardly impose any fine at all. The right hon. Gentleman does not know the weaknesses of our magisterial system, or he would give a more complacent hearing to my opinion.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.