HC Deb 31 March 1919 vol 114 cc1004-5

D. At the end of paragraph (a) of Sub-section (1) of Section two of the principal Act, the following words shall be inserted: Provided that in the case of any dwelling-house let at a progressive rent payable under a tenancy agreement or lease, the maximum rent payable under such tenancy agreement or lease shall be the standard rent.

Lords Message: The Lords insist upon their Amendment for the following reason: Because this Amendment is clearly in accordance with the intention of the principal Act and of this Bill.

Mr. CLYDE

I beg to move, That this House doth not insist upon its disagreement to the said Lords Amendment. This Amendment, as I have explained, was put forward mainly, if not entirely, in the interests of certain veteran soldiers, garden cities, and so on. There have been proposals of the kind in connection with discharged soldiers who have already established a claim to a tenancy on the basis of what they call a progressive rent—that is to say, a rent which increases from time to time. We pointed out when the Amendment was under consideration here, that no qualification of the kind had been made in 1915 when the principal Act was passed, and though we did not offer any very strenuous opposition to it we did think it was better not to complicate the amending Act by any qualification of this kind. However, the Lords have seen fit to insist upon the Amendment, and one has to make up his mind as to whether we shall lose the Bill by disagreeing again, whether on the one hand we can make an Amendment on this point, or whether on the other hand we should accept the Amendment. It seems quite clear that we cannot take the first course. As for the second, that has been very carefully considered, and I do not think we can do anything by way of Amendment, which would be satisfactory, in order to effect a limitation in the application of the Clause to any one kind of lease with the progressive rent, as compared with another kind of lease with a progressive rent. After all, the cases are not many. On the whole, therefore, the recommendation we make is that the House do not insist on disagreeing.