HOUSING (FINANCIAL PROVISIONS) BILL. (Hansard, 6 August 1924)

§ The MINISTER of HEALTH (Mr. Wheatley)
I beg to move, "That the Lords Amendments be now considered."
5.0 P.M.
Perhaps the House will bear with me, and it might expedite business, if I stated in a very few words the attitude which the Government intend to adopt towards these Amendments. The Amendments might be properly divided into three classes. In the first class we might put the Government Amendments which have been inserted in the Lords to meet undertakings given by the Government in this House while the Bill was passing through the Report stage. I hope that these Amendments will be satisfactory, and of course the Government will accept them. The second class of Amendments includes those which have the effect of making more emphatic provisions in the Bill, or modifying provisions in a way which does not interfere with the main features of the Bill. The policy which I adopted, the House will remember, during the Committee stage and also on the Report stage, was to meet the views of the other sections of the House as far as I could without endangering the main objects of the Bill. I propose to adopt that attitude towards the Amendments inserted by the Lords, and in so far as I do not regard them as destructive of the Measure I will advise the House to accept them. The Amendments which I do regard as destructive are a number. I take three, and I state for the others that there are certain modifications that may be proposed that will not interfere with the substance of the Amendments. The Amendments on which I propose to appeal to the House to support me in resisting them are those which deal with rents. Of course these, if carried, as I explained in the Commons—and I was supported in that by the right hon. Member for Ladywood (Mr. N. Chamberlain)—would destroy one of the principles of the Bill. I would ask the House to resist the Lords Amendments in regard to rents. I would also ask the House to maintain the original provision in the Bill giving the 2970 building industry three years in which to carry out their promises in regard to housing. I think that all sections of the House will agree that they ought to have a reasonable opportunity of fulfilling their promises, and that three years is not too long. I would also ask the House to resist the Lords Amendment proposing that the Draft Orders shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament, and to insist on the original provision that the Orders shall be submitted only to the House of Commons. May I, in a concluding word, appeal to the House to enable me to get through as quickly as possible, in order to meet the convenience of the other House and to enable them to deal with the Bill before this part of the Session concludes?

§ Sir WILLIAM JOYNSON-HICKS
I fully appreciate the action of the Minister, and we will reciprocate it very fully on this side of the House. The right hon. Gentleman has told us what he intends to insist upon and what Amendments he will agree to. There are only two or three small Amendments upon which I and some of my Friends may desire to say a word, and we shall all be glad to facilitate the sending of the Bill back to the other House.

§ Mr. E. BROWN
I did not catch what the right hon. Gentleman said with regard to the Lords Amendment altering the numbers of houses in the building schedule.

§ Mr. WHEATLEY
That is a consequential Amendment.