RENT AND MORTGAGE INTEREST RESTRICTIONS BILL. (Hansard, 9 July 1923)

HC Deb 09 July 1923 vol 166 cc953-1137 953

§ As amended (in Standing Committee) considered.

§ The following new Clause stood on the Paper in the name of the hon. Member for Edgbaston (Sir F. Lowe): As regards any houses not fully decontrolled by the twenty-fourth day of June, nineteen hundred and twenty-five, Section seven of the principal Act shall continue to apply.

§ Mr. SPEAKER
The proposal of the hon. Member will come better as an Amendment to a Clause in the Bill as it stands. If he looks at the Paper, he will see that there is a similar proposal to amend Clause 10, in the name of one of his colleagues, and that that Amendment raises the same point as the hon. Member's new Clause. I propose to call that Amendment when we reach it.

§ Sir F. LOWE
That Amendment is rather more complicated, and has effects which my new Clause has not. I should not have thought that the new Clause was necessarily out of order. It deals with a definite matter.

§ Mr. SPEAKER
The hon. Member's new Clause is not out of order, only out of place. It should come as an Amendment to Clause 10. The hon. Member can bring it up, as an Amendment to Clause 10, in any form he pleases.

§ Sir F. LOWE
I would prefer to bring it forward as a separate Clause rather than as an Amendment to Clause 10, and, if it be in order, I should like to move it.

§ 4.0 P.M.

§ Mr. SPEAKER
It is not in order as a new Clause. It will be in order as an Amendment to Clause 10. Where a matter can properly be dealt with by an Amendment to a Clause, it should not be brought up as a new Clause. The third Clause on the Paper (Application of principal Act in certain cases) is the one which I select first.

Mr. TREVELYAN THOMSON
With regard to the second new Clause on the Paper (Provisions as to notice to quit), shall I be in order in moving it later, as 954 an Amendment, say, to Clause 2? There is no Amendment on the Paper, and it would therefore have to be a manuscript Amendment.