HC Deb 30 July 1925 vol 187 cc777-80
Mr. STEPHEN

I beg to move to leave out the Clause.

I do so in order to put a question to the Minister. Some time after the present administration came into office I think the Minister of Labour was responsible for altering the conditions under which extended benefit was given. There was the. Regulation made with regard to the eight stamps, or the 30 stamps in all, as a condition of the recipient receiving benefit. I want to know, now that the Minister is seeking to get from this House an extended period in which he is able to exercise this waiver in connection with the first statutory condition, whether he can give us an assurance that there will not be a tightening up of those conditions; that all the alterations contemplated are those already stated by the Minister, and put into the Bill. Frankly, I myself have been very suspicious with regard to this Measure because of the difficulty that we find in getting any exact statement from the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary, and I would like to know if the Parliamentary Secretary could give us the assurance that all that the unemployed have got to fear in connection with the Regulations are the statutory condition and these statements that the Minister has made in connection with this Measure. I would like the assurance that there will be no more onerous conditions imposed upon these people during this extended period when the Minister is being allowed to waive the first statutory condition. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary, on behalf of the Minister, will be able to give this House that assurance.

Mr. WALLHEAD

I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. BETTERTON

I think the House will realise, that the request which the hon. Member has made is one to which I should not be justified in acceding. It is perfectly obvious that in the exercise of a discretion of this kind the Minister must be moved and rightly moved by the circumstances prevailing at the time. He cannot tell in the near future, or indeed in the more distant future, what the circumstances with regard to trade or employment or industry may be. The Minister is not present, but I think I can say for him that he will exercise this discretion in a manner which will be fair to all concerned and it would not be right to fetter or bind his discretion in this matter in the way in which the hon. Member asks me to do. The manner in which he exercises it must depend on the circumstances of the time.

Mr. BUCHANAN

If the Parliamentary Secretary cannot give us the assurance for which the hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) has asked, can he at least give us this assurance—that no alteration will be made in the immediate future. Some of us are gravely disturbed at the condition of affairs in the country and at the possibilities of the next week or two. Surely we might have an assurance that the Ministry or the Government do not contemplate making any change in the Regulations within the next few weeks. If such an assurance cannot be given to cover a very long period, I suggest it might be given to cover a reasonable period.

Mr. DUNCAN GRAHAM

I should like the Parliamentary Secretary to inform the House whether it is the Minister of Labour who is to interpret these Regulations or whether they are to be interpreted by the managers of Employment Exchanges, rota committees or some of the other numerous individuals who come between the Minister and the person claiming benefit. Personally, I am anxious to know with whom we shall have to deal in the event of these Regulations being passed as contemplated. It is only reasonable and fair that the Parliamentary Secretary should give us some information on that point. We have found in the past when raising particular questions, that it was not the Minister himself who was responsible but some member of the Department, and the unemployed person is entitled in this case to know who is directly responsible for the interpretation of the Regulations.

Mr. MAXTON

May I urge upon the Parliamentary Secretary to accede to the request of the hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) and give us some indication of what is in the mind of the Ministry on this matter. This is a tremendous power which the House is giving to one Minister. We are leaving in his hands a discretion as to whether or not a very large number of the unemployed in this country are to receive extended benefit. I hope that in the many estimates made and the many actuarial calculations that have been carried out by the officials of the Ministry they have roughly drawn out a plan as to the period during which the Minister is to exercise his discretion. Without attempting to interfere with that discretion, it is reasonable to ask the Par- liamentary Secretary how long they contemplate carrying on the present rights.

Mr. SPEAKER

I am afraid this discussion is going beyond what was originally intended. That matter does not really arise on the Clause.

Mr. BETTERTON

With the leave of the House, may I say that I think the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mr. Duncan Graham) and the hon. Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) have misconceived the purport of Clause 2 and the object of the question which was put by the hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen). With regard to the question put by the hon. Member for Camlachie, I certainly will say that no change in the immediate future is in contemplation, and when, therefore, he asks me whether, in view of the rather perplexing and discouraging immediate outlook, it is proposed to take any action during that period, I say, certainly not.