That, for the purpose of any Act of the present Session to amend the Law relating to insurance against unemployment, it is
expedient to authorise the payment out of moneys provided by Parliament:
§ (a) in respect of the period between the end of the deficiency period and a date to be prescribed under the Act of a contribution towards benefit and other payments to be made out of the unemployment fund equal to the present contribution, and from and after the date so prescribed of such a contribution at a rate not exceeding one-fourth of the aggregate amount of the contributions received from employers and employed persons ill any year 611 being contributions at rates not exceeding in the ease of men one shilling, in the case of women nine-pence, in the case of boys sixpence, and in the case of girls fourpenee halfpenny; and
§ (b) of any expenses incurred by the Minister of Labour in paying to local education authorities, in respect of the amount by which the administrative expenses of local education authorities are increased by any additional duties undertaken under the Act in connection with the administration of benefit, such sums as may be determined in accordance with a scale to be fixed under the Act."
§ Resolution read a Second time.
§ Mr. SPEAKER
With regard to the Amendments on the Paper in the names of the hon. Members for Penistone (Mr. Pringle) and West Middlesbrough (Mr. T. Thomson), I understand that it is not desired to proceed with the first one—that in the name of the hon. Member for West Middlesbrough—if the second be in order. I have been carefully considering the second Amendment. In the Committee stage, it stood on the Paper with another Amendment, and I think by the Chairman was read as one with the preceding Amendment. It now stands on the Paper as a separate proposition. I have a good deal of doubt as to whether or not it imposes a charge. I have not been able absolutely to convince myself that it does. In these circumstances, I think it my duty to give the hon. Member the benefit of the doubt and allow him to move the Amendment.
§ Mr. PRINGLE
I beg to move, in paragraph (a), to leave out the wordsand from and after the date so prescribed of such a contribution at a rate not exceeding one-fourth of the aggregate amount of the contributions received from employers and employed persons in any year being contributions at rates not exceeding in the case of men one shilling, in the case of women ninepence, in the case of boys sixpence, and in the case of girls fourpence halfpenny.I am obliged to you, Sir, for the consideration which you have shown to me in calling upon this Amendment. The point which it raises was put before the Committee last night in a somewhat different form, and unfortunately we had not the advantage of a reply from the Government upon it. If hon. Members read the Resolution they will see that it deals with three periods. The first period is described as the deficiency 612 period; the second period is the period between the end of the deficiency period and a date to be prescribed under the Act, and there is a further period beyond that date, during which it. is the assumption of the Government that normal conditions will arrive. The object of the Amendment is to delete from the Resolution the financial provision made for that final period. Those who support the Amendment regard this provision as altogether premature. In the first instance, in making provision even for the second period we are going a long way. I would remind hon. Members that the date on which this period will end is at present unknown. Varying forecasts as to its termination have been made in different parts of the House. The Minister of Labour, for example, made a forecast that the deficiency period—that is the period in which provision will be made for payments of benefit out of the loan—may be expected to come to an end in two or two-and-a-half years. Other hon. Members who take a less optimistic view of the prospects of trade, regard that forecast as unduly sanguine, and I think they have some justification for suggesting that the deficiency period will not end until at least four years have passed. It seems to me it would be quite enough to make provision for those four years and the Government could come to the House at the end of the four years, and apply for such provision as would then be necessary in the state of affairs then existing.
We do not take exception to going beyond that period and making provision for the period between the end of the deficiency period and the prescribed date, whatever that may be. The reason why we do not take exception to the provision made for this intermediate period is, that we think the Government. on the whole, are making a fair contribution. They are providing that the existing State contribution is to continue during that time. It is, however, when the prescribed date has been reached—and nobody knows when it will be reached—that they are seeking under this Bill, which is essentially an emergency Bill, to stereotype for all time the State contribution towards unemployment insurance. We regard that as bad from two points of view. First, we regard it as had that we should now be making provision for 613 a time which is altogether in the indefinite future, a time which not even the right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Labour can forecast. If the right hon. Gentleman cannot predict the date, he has still less means of giving any forecast of the conditions which will prevail when that hypothetical date arrives. I say, therefore, that this House has no business to make a permanent provision for hypothetical conditions, as to which we have absolutely no knowledge whatever. I think there should be general agreement on all sides of the House as to the soundness of that proposition. Grave blunders were made during the War by doing precisely the same thing. I am not going to enter into details, but I would quote, as an illustration, the enormous commitments undertaken in regard to education before 1918. They were hypothetical, and while they contained admirable proposals, they were commitments which were going to fall upon the country at a time when we had no idea as to what was the financial capacity of the country. That is the reason why so ninny of them have gone by the board. We are repeating precisely the same mistake under this Act, making a permanent provision for a time in the future, as to the conditions of which everybody in this House is ignorant, and I submit that we ought to do nothing of the kind.
There is a further reason why I think this Amendment ought to be accepted by the Government. If this provision be made, you have settled the permanent form of unemployment insurance, and when the emergency period is over, whenever that may be, when this time of stress has passed away, it will not then be necessary for the Government to come to the House. [Interruption.] An hon. Friend on the Labour benches is of a sanguine disposition and predicts that his friends will then be on the Treasury Bench. He may be disappointed. [HON. MEMBERS: "No"] It is conceivable that he may be disappointed, and therefore he should act on the basis of the worst possible hypothesis, and that is that the present Government might still be there. It is the design and the motive of this Government that we ought to deal with, and undoubtedly it is their motive, by making this provision, to make it unnecessary for them to come to the House in future, so that the House will not be 614 in a position to make demands upon the Government for a more generous provision for the purposes of unemployment. All that will be left to the House then will be, by means of a private Member's Resolution at 8.15, to pass a pious Resolution, which will have no effect on the legislation of the country—Resolutions such as we have been passing this week and last week. They are of no account, whereas, if this provision be not made, then, when the emergency period comes to an end, the Government will require to legislate, the Bill will have to go through all its stages—Second Reading, Committee, Report, and Third Reading, and Committee and Report stages of the Financial Resolution—and the House will have ample opportunity of impressing their views on the Government as to what is the equitable provision then to be made. Thereby Parliamentary control will be safeguarded and preserved. It is for these two reasons that I am moving this Amendment—first of all, because this House, ignorant of what the future may hold, is not in a position to make provision for a hypothetical case and, in the second place, if this provision be made, we are abandoning that Parliamentary control which it is the duty of Members on all sides of the House, on every occasion, to do their utmost to preserve.
§ Mr. HAYDAY
I desire to support the Amendment, because I am rather disappointed with the position. T should have thought that, after the case that was put to the Minister last night for some slight revision of this Financial Resolution, we might have been presented with such an offer from the Minister as would meet the undoubtedly justifiable objections which were then raised. I quite agree with the Mover of the Amendment, because if it be carried, the Bill will still retain a provision carrying over the two periods—first, the special period for uncovenanted benefit that makes necessary the higher form of contribution, and, secondly, the deficiency period which, so long as it remains, renders the high contribution necessary, that meaning a period of between two-and-a-half and four years before we get to any point where the Fund will be sound financially and clear of its debt responsibility. That, I suggest, is the only time 615 when the House can properly legislate with a knowledge of the circumstances with which they are then presented. Fifteen shillings a week is fixed as the rate of unemployment allowance for certain periods, with five shillings for the wife of the married applicant and one shilling for each child.
It is upon that basis that the first part of the Financial Resolution proceeds in conjunction with the length of the deficiency period, but who can say that the circumstances that will have arisen at the end of the deficiency period may not necessitate a much more generous weekly allowance of unemployment benefit or may not call for a general revision of the whole of the financial arrangements associated with Part II of the National Health Insurance Act? That being so, the varying figures, which are too wide and too uncertain—with a maximum of 6d. from the employer, 6d. from the workman, and 3d. from the State, and a minimum of 4d. from the employer, 4d. from the workman, and 2d. from the State—those figures, anticipating, or attempting to anticipate, what will be the condition of things, possibly, four years hence, leave such a grave amount of doubt that I feel that the Amendment is one that ought to be carried, seeing that the financial provisions contained in the first part of the Resolution are ample for carrying us over until the end of the deficiency period.
§ The MINISTER of LABOUR (Sir Montague Barlow)
I think perhaps we are making rather an unnecessary bother about what is, after all, a comparatively small point. I agree with a good deal that was said by the hon. Member for Penistone (Mr. Pringle). He said, and quite truly said, that although this Bill does propose to make provision, certainly for 18 months and, possibly, for a longer period, still, in the nature of the circumstances with which we are all perfectly familiar—the uncertainties of the future, and so on—it is obvious that the Bill is not the last word in this matter, and that there must be, when times become normal again, a readjustment after full consideration of the circumstances. That is common ground between all of us. It is also a commonplace, in all these industrial difficulties, that the future is uncertain. I did suggest in the White 616 Paper that, on a very conservative basis and as an outside figure, a million and a quarter would be a fair figure to take for an average over a very considerable period, and I indicated the period, but it is quite possible, and I venture to hope, that that may prove to be an unnecessarily large estimate.
I do not know what are the views of hon. Members opposite with regard to the principle of the dependants' allowances, but what I was anxious to do, by the Clauses of the Bill and the Financial Resolution, was to guard against any risk during the interim period, till the final readjustment arrived, of our being in difficulties with regard to the dependants' allowances. I will draw the attention of the House to this point, that this financial provision is merely an enabling provision; in other words, supposing the Clauses in the Bill continuing the dependants' allowances for the present, until the final readjustment takes place, were passed, and there were no financial Clause at all, then, if the deficiency period came to an end, the provision for dependants' allowances would he of no effect, because there would be no money behind it. But that equally carries with it the corollary that, supposing we passed the enabling Clauses in their present shape, it would be possible in another place, upstairs, to discuss the whole question of the dependants' allowances as a matter of principle. I do not say what the result would be, hut it might very well he that there would be considerable adjustments, or even limitations. of the dependants' allowances within the ambit that I have sketched.
I suggest to the House that the proper course would be to let the Resolution go through its present stage. It is impossible that there can be serious difficulties or the permanent obligation involved in this Resolution which has been darkly hinted at by hon. Members opposite. It is merely a means of preventing any risk of our having on the Statute Book de pendants' allowances in theory, with no financial backing behind such provision, if by any chance trade did improve very rapidly and the deficiency period came to an end sooner than is anticipated. But if it be found, when in Committee, having got this enabling provision so far as finance is concerned, that it is desirable to deal with the particular principle of 617 dependants' allowances, we shall not be in any way hampered; we shall have the power, if we wish it, to adjust or to limit the provision as to dependants' allowances in any way that is thought desirable.
Mr. TREVELYAN THOMSON
I think the House is indebted to the right hon. Gentleman for his explanation, but I suggest that it is not sufficient justification for carrying a Financial Resolution which really takes us very much further than the Minister would have us believe. I rather gathered that he suggested that at the end of the deficiency period we might be met with financial difficulties, but surely he has overlooked the fact that he has provided for that in the prescribed period, and that he has power to fix that prescribed period at some considerably distant date.
§ Sir M. BARLOW
Only from the beginning of the next insurance year, which might be quite a short period of months.
As my hon. Friend says, it may be 11 months, but whether it be six mouths or 11 months, I submit that the very fact that the end of the deficiency period cannot possibly be arrived at within three or four years is sufficient. I noticed that the right hon. Gentleman skillfully skated over that part of his argument by hoping that things would be better, and that he had taken an unduly pessimistic view of the trade outlook, but I would again refer him, as I did list night, to his. White Paper, on page 5 of which he shows that, according to the best information that he has, the deficiency will amount in October, 1924, to over £20,000,000. That is for 18 months hence, and if you have a deficiency of £20,000,000 in existence 18 months hence, I submit that that deficiency will not be wiped out, cannot be wiped out, within the next three years. If hon. Members follow the right hon. Gentleman's figures, they will find that in the six months from April, 1924, to October, 1924, the deficiency is reduced by less than £2,000,000. That means a rate of £4,000,000 a year, and therefore, if the improvement in trade were no greater than is anticipated, it would take five years from the end of the financial period to wipe out the deficiency. We all hope that trade will improve at a much greater rate, but even 618 in the most favourable circumstances I submit that, according to the Paper which the right hon. Gentleman has given to the House, this deficiency period cannot possibly come to an end before three or three and a half years are over.
§ Sir M. BARLOW
I do not wish to interrupt my hon. Friend, but we really want to get the facts. I indicated, when I was speaking a moment ago, that the figures in the White Paper are based on a million and a quarter unemployed persons as the average. I said that that was taking a conservative view, that that was on the supposition that times are going to be not at all good, hut if times do improve—and I venture to think a million and a quarter is on the conservatime side and is a high figure—and we get the average down to a million or under a million, we should he paying off very much more rapidly than on the basis outlined in the White Paper, and therefore it. is not right to say that I indicate that under no possible circumstances can the deficiency period come to an end before three or four years. What I do indicate is that I have got to make provision on that basis, hut that if times improve, as I hope they will improve, so that the average is actually less than a million and a quarter, then those figures will not prove correct, and we shall get the deficiency period ending very much sooner.
I am indebted to the right hon. Gentleman for his more favourable view of the trade outlook, and the explanation he has given, but I submit that, even then, it will be two or even two and a half years, under the most sanguine expectations, before you come to the end of this deficiency period. But, be that as it may, as I said earlier, the Minister has already provided, and the Amendment we have moved does not affect, that prescribed period which will carry us over this interregnum, about which he has some fears from a financial point of view. If the prescribed period is not long enough, it is quite possible for the Committee upstairs to lengthen the period provided in the Bill. That will get over the possible risk of inadequate finance to provide for the dependants until a new Bill is brought forward. To a Bill dealing with an emergency, you should not attach permanent financial restrictions which will bind this House in 619 the future. I do not suggest that the right hon. Gentleman will take advantage of what is in this Bill, but one never knows how long he may be there, or who may be his successor in these times, and, therefore, the House must guard against unforeseen possibilities. It is very undesirable that the House should put it in the power of any Minister for the time being not to have to come to the House in order to revise these conditions, which are passed in a period of emergency and with some considerable haste. Therefore, I do appeal to the right hon. Gentleman that he should meet us to the extent of accepting the Amendment, which will give him all the financial assistance he requires up to the furthermost period that will be necessary, and this will put pressure upon him and the Government to prepare some permanent scheme, which we all agree is necessary, as this is not the last word on unemployment insurance. It will be an additional reason why the Government should expedite the provision of means to deal more adequately with the problem, which is very insufficiently dealt with in the Bill. Therefore, I hope the Minister will meet us, realising that he has the protection he requires, at the same time giving the House further control over legislation in the future.
§ Sir G. COLLINS
Probably the best argument in favour of the Amendment was the speech of the Minister himself. He said, in the course of his remarks, it is common ground between us that there must be a readjustment in unemployment insurance when times become normal. We suggest that that is the right time to adjust the finances of the Bill. The Minister of Labour, however, thinks that in the abnormal times with which we are faced to-day we should legislate for the future. There is one further argument I would like to address to the right hon.
§ Gentleman. This Insurance Bill covers some ten and a half million people. It has only been working for two or three years during very abnormal times. Is this the right time, when such large numbers of people have been brought under Unemployment Insurance, that we should legislate for the future? I think the right hon. Gentleman is asking the House of Commons too much this evening when he asks the House to decide, not only what the contribution from the State shall be in the future, but probably the contributions from the employers and employés. As he knows, there is very seldom a Division on the Second Reading of these Bills. All sections of the House are anxious to treat this matter with seriousness, and when we move, as we did last night, and again this evening, not to prejudge the future, not to settle to-day what the burden on the State will be in the future, we do not wish to commit future Parliaments to their course of action, especially at a time when Unemployment Insurance is going through many stages. There is a largely growing body of opinion in the country that, perhaps, the best way to deal with this subject is by insurance by industry. I express no opinion on that, but if this Resolution be passed in the form in which it is on the Order Paper, it may well be a death-blow to this particular form of dealing with this problem. Therefore, at this very late hour, I rise, in no spirit of hostility, to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he will accept the Amendment and leave future Parliaments to decide that matter according to their judgment.
§ Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Resolution."
§ The House divided: Ayes, 235: Noes, 154.623
|Division No. 27.]||AYES.||[7.55 p.m.|
|AggGardner, Sir James Tynte||Bell. Lleut.-Col. W. C. H. (Devizes)||Brown. J. W. (Middlesbrough, E.)|
|Ainsworth, Captain Charles||Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.||Bruford, R.|
|Alexander. E. E. (Leyton, Cast)||Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drako)||Bruton, Sir James|
|Alexander, Col. M. (Southwark)||Berry, Sir George||Buckley, Lieut.-Colonel A.|
|Amery. Ht. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.||Birchail, Major J. Dearman||Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James|
|Archer-shee, Lieut.-Colonel Martin||Blades, Sir George Rowland||Burn, Colonel Sir Charles Rosdew|
|Ashley, Lt.-Col. Wilfrid W.||Blundell, F. N.||Burney, Com. (Middx., Uxbridge)|
|Astor, J. J. (Kent, Dover)||Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.||Butler, H. M. (Leeds, North)|
|Baird, Rt. Hon. Sir John Lawrence||Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.||Button, H. S.|
|Baldwin. Rt. Hon. Stanley||Brass, Captain W.||Cadogan. Major Edward|
|Balfour, George (Hampstead)||Brassey, Sir Leonard||Campion, Lieut.-Colonel W. R.|
|Barlow, Rt. Hon. Sir Montague||Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Cllve||Cassels. J. D.|
|Barnett, Major Richard W.||Brown, Major D. C. (Hexham)||Cautley. Henry Strother|
|Barnston, Major Harry||Brown, Brig.-Gen. Clifton (Newbury)||Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Atton)|
|Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord R. (Hitchin)||Hopkins, John W. W.||Raine, W.|
|Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton||Hopklnson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley||Rankin, Captain James Stuart|
|Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)||Houfton, John Plowright||Rawson, Lieut.-Com. A. C.|
|Chapman, Sir S.||Howard, Capt. D. (Cumberland, N.j||Remer, J. R.|
|Churchman, Sir Arthur||Howard-Bury, Lieut.-Col. C. K.||Rentoul, G. S.|
|Clarry, Reginald George||Hudson, Capt. A.||Reynolds, w. G. W.|
|Clayton, G. C.||Hughes, Collingwood||Richardson, Lt.-Col. Sir P. (Chertsey)|
|Cobb, Sir Cyril||Hume, G. H.||Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)|
|Cockerill, Brigadier-General G. K.||Hume-Wllllams, sir W. Ellis||Robertson, J. D. (Islington, W.)|
|Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips||Hunter-Weston. Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer||Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs., Strettord)|
|Colvin, Brig. General Richard Beale||Hurd, Percy A.||Roundell, Colonel R. F.|
|Conway, Sir W. Martin||Hurst, Lleut.-Colonel Gerald B.||Ruggles-Brise, Major E.|
|Cope, Major William||Hutchison, G. A. C. (Midlothian, N.)||Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)|
|Cory, Sir J. H. (Cardiff, South)||Hutchison, W. (Kelvingrove)||Russell, William (Bolton)|
|Craig, Captain C. C. (Antrim, South)||Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.||Russell-Wells, Sir Sydney|
|Crooke, J. S. (Deritend)||Jephcott, A. R.||Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)|
|Curzon, Captain Viscount||Jodrell, Sir Neville Paul||Sanders, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert A.|
|Daiziel, Sir D. (Lambeth, Brixton)||Johnson, Sir L. (Walthamstow, E.)||Sanderson, Sir Frank B.|
|Davidson, J. C. C. (Hemel Hempstead)||Joynson-Hicks, Sir William||Sandon, Lord|
|Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.||Kennedy, Captain M. S. Nigel||Shepperson, E. W.|
|Davies, Thomas (Cirencester)||King, Captain Henry Douglas||Shipwright, Captain D.|
|Dawson, Sir Philip||KinlochCooke, Sir Clement||Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)|
|Doyle, N. Grattan||Lamb, J. Q.||Simpson-Hinchcliffe, W. A.|
|Du Pre, Colonel William Baring||Lane-Fox, Lieut.-Colonel G. R.||Skelton, A. N.|
|Edmondson, Major A. J.||Law, Rt. Hon. A, B. (Glasgow, C.)||Smith, Sir Allan M. (Croydon, South)|
|Elliot, Capt. Walter E. (Lanark)||Lloyd-Greame, Rt. Hon. Sir P.||Smith, Sir Harold (Wavertree)|
|Ellis, R. G.||Lorden, John William||Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)|
|England, Lieut.-Colonel A.||Lort-Willlams, J.||Somerville, Daniel (Barrow-in-Furness)|
|Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)||Lougher, L.||Sparkes, H. W.|
|Eyres-Monsell, Com. Bolton M.||Loyd, Arthur Thomas (Abingdon)||Stanley, Lord|
|Falcon, Captain Michael||Lumley, L. R.||Steel, Major S. Strang|
|Falle, Major Sir Bertram Godfrey||Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm||Stewart. Gershom (Wirral)|
|Fawkes. Mafor F. H.||McNeill, Ronald (Kent, Canterbury)||Stott, Lt.-Col. W. H.|
|Fildes, Henry||Makins, Brigadier-General E.||Stuart, Lord C. Crichton.|
|Flanagan, W. H.||Malone, Major P. B. (Tottenham, S.)||Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser|
|Ford, Patrick Johnston||Margesson, H. D. R.||Sugden, Sir Wilfrid H,|
|Fraser, Major Sir Keith||Mason, Lieut.-Col. C. K.||Sutcliffe, T.|
|Furncss, G. J.||Milne, J. S. Wardlaw||Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.|
|Galbraith, J. F. W.||Mitchell, W. F. (Saffron Walden)||Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)|
|Ganzoni, Sir John||Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)||Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)|
|Gaunt, Rear-Admiral Sir Guy R.||Molloy, Major L.G.S.||Thorpe, Captain John Henry|
|Gilbert, James Daniel||Molson, Major John Eisdale||Titchfield, Marquess of|
|Gray, Harold (Cambridge)||Moore, Major-General Sir Newton J.||Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement|
|Greaves-Lord, Walter||Morden, Col. W. Grant||Turton, Edmund Russborough|
|Greene, Lt.-Col. Sir W. (Hack'y, N.J||Moreing, Captain Algernon H.||Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.|
|Guinness, Lieut.-Col. Hon. W. E.||Murchison, C. K.||Ward, Col. L. (Kingston-upon-Hull)|
|Gwynne, Rupert S.||Nail, Major Joseph||Waring, Major Walter|
|Hacking, Captain Douglas H.||Newman, Colonel J. R. P. (Finchley)||Watson, Capt. J. (Stockton-on-Tees)|
|Hall, Lieut.-Col. sir F. (Dulwlch)||Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)||Watts, Dr. T. (Man., Withington)|
|Hall, Rr-Admi Sir W.(Liv'p'I.W.D'by)||Newson, Sir percy Wilson||Wells, S. R,|
|Halstead, Major D.||Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)||Weston, Colonel John Wakefield|
|Hamilton, Sir George C. (Altrincham)||Nicholson, Brig.-Gen. J. (Westminster)||White, Lt.-Col. G. D. 9Southport)|
|Harmsworth, Hon. E. C. (Kent)||Nicholson William G. (Petersfield)||Whitla, Sir William|
|Harvey, Major S. E.||Nield, Sir Herbert||Winterton, Earl|
|Havvke, John Anthony||Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William||Wise, Frederick|
|Hay, Major T. W. (Norfolk, South)||Paget, T. G.||Wolmer, Viscount|
|Hennessy, Major J. R. G.||Parker, Owen (Kettering)||Wood, Rt. Hn. Edward F. L. (Ripon)|
|Herbert, S. (Scarborough)||Pease William Edwin||Wood, Major Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)|
|Hewett, Sir J, P.||Pennefather, De Fonblanuue||Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.|
|Hilder, Lieut.-Colonel Frank||Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)||Yate, Colonel Sir Charles Edward|
|Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.||Perkins, Colonel E. K.||Yerburgh, R. D. T.|
|Hogg, Rt. Hon.Sir D. (St. Marylebone)||Peto, Basil E.||Young, Rt. Hon. E. H. (Norwich)|
|Hohler, Gerald Fitzroy||Phllipson, H. H.|
|Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard||Pielou, D. P.||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.-|
|Hood, Sir Joseph||Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton||Colonel Leslie Wilson and Colonel Gibbs.|
|Raeburn, Sir William H.|
|Adams, D.||Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)||Darbishire, C. W.|
|Adamson, Rt. Hon. William||Buchanan, G.||Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)|
|Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)||Buckle, J.||Davies, J. C. (Denbigh, Denbigh)|
|Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')||Burgess, S.||Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)|
|Ammon, Charles George||Burnie, Major J. (Bootle)||Davison, J. E. (Smethwick)|
|Attlee, C. R.||Butler, J. R. M. (Cambridge Univ.)||Dudgeon, Major C. R.|
|Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)||Buxton, Charles (Accrington)||Duffy, T. Gavan|
|Barnes, A.||Buxton, Noel (Norfolk, North)||Duncan, C.|
|Batey, Joseph||Cairns, John||Dunnico, H.|
|Bonwick, A.||Cape, Thomas||Ede, James Chuter|
|Bowdler, W. A.||Charleton, H. C.||Edmonds, G.|
|Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.||Clarke, Sir E. C.||Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwelity)|
|Brlant, Frank||Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.||Emlyn-Jones, J. E. (Dorset, N.)|
|Bromfield. William||Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)||Entwistle, Major C. F.|
|Brotherton, J.||Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)||Falconer, J.|
|Foot, Isaac||Kirkwood, D.||Robinson, W. C. (York, Elland)|
|Gosling, Harry||Lansbury, George||Saklatvala, S.|
|Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)||Lawson, John James||Salter, Dr. A.|
|Graham, W. (Edinburgh, Central)||Leach, W.||Scrymgeour, E.|
|Greenall, T.||Lee, F.||Sexton, James|
|Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)||Lees-Smith, H. B. (Keighley)||Shaw, Hon. Alex. (Kilmarnock)|
|Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)||Lewis, Thomas A.||Shinwell, Emanuel|
|Groves, T.||Lowth, T.||Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)|
|Grundy, T. W.||Lunn, William||Sitch, Charles H.|
|Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)||MacDonald, J. R. (Aberavon)||Smith, T. (Pontefract)|
|Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)||M'Entee, V. L.||Snell, Harry|
|Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)||Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)||Snowden, Philip|
|Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)||March, S.||Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)|
|Hancock, John George||Marshall, Sir Arthur H.||Spencer, H. H. (Bradford. S.)|
|Harbord, Arthur||Martin, F. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, E.)||Stephen, Campbell|
|Hardle, George D.||Maxton, James||Stewart, J (St. Rollox)|
|Harris, Percy A.||Morel, E. D.||Sullivan, J.|
|Hartshorn, Vernon||Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)||Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)|
|Hastings, Patrick||Muir, John W.||Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)|
|Hay, Captain J. P. (Cathcart)||Murnin, H.||Thornton, M.|
|Hayday, Arthur||Murray, R. (Renfrew, Western)||Turner, Ben|
|Hemmerde, E. G.||Nichol. Robert||Walsh, Stephen (Lancaster, Ince)|
|Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (N'castle, E.)||O'Grady, Captain James||Warne, G. H.|
|Henderson, T. (Glasgow)||Oliver, George Harold||Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)|
|Hill, A.||Paling, W.||Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)|
|Hinds, John||Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)||Westwood, J.|
|Hirst, G. H.||Phillipps, Vivian||Wheatley, J.|
|Hodge, Rt. Hon. John||Ponsonby, Arthur||Whiteley, W.|
|Hogge, James Myles||Potts, John S.||Wignall, James|
|Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)||Pringle, W. M. R.||Williams, David (Swansea, E.)|
|John, William (Rhondda, West)||Richards, R.||Williams. T. (York, Don Valley)|
|Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)||Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)||Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)|
|Johnstons, Harcourt (Willesden, East)||Riley, Ben||Wood, Major MM. (Aberdeen, C.)|
|Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)||Ritson, J.||Wright, W.|
|Jones, R. T. (Carnarvon)||Roberts, C. H. (Derby)||Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)|
|Jowett, F. W. (Bradford, East)||Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)|
|Kenvnn, Barnet||Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—|
|Mr. T. Thomson and Mr. Linfield.|
Resolution agreed to.