I beg to move, in page 26, line 16, at the end, to insert the words:(c) that the rents applicable to the houses shall be the same as those charged for similar houses provided by the local authority or, if there are no similar houses, then as may be in proportion to those charged for other houses in the neighbourhood, having regard to size, materials, and 326 amenities, but such rents shall be subject to rebates in the case of individual tenants, as hereinafter provided;(d) that rebates from the rents of the houses may be granted to individual tenants in such manner and on such terms and conditions as the local authority may think fit, provided that the total amount of such rebates does not exceed in any one year the total amount of the rent pool formed as hereinafter enacted;(e) that there shall be paid by the local authority in each year into a rent pool a sum equal to the difference between the rents applicable to the houses, in accordance with this sub-section, and.This Amendment is divided into three parts. The first part deals with rents applicable to the houses built by the local authorities, and let at a standard rent. The second part gives an opportunity to the local authorities to give rebates on rents for certain specified conditions. The third part forms a pool by the local authority out of which the rebates can be paid. Clause 27 deals with the special conditions which the local authority may carry out in dealing with the rents to be charged. Among the conditions we find, in Sub-section (1, c), these words:…. the authority may charge in respect of any house such rent as they may think fit, and may grant to the tenant of any house such rebates from rent, subject to such terms and conditions as they may think fit ….This Amendment was moved in Committee by my right hon. Friend the Member for Edgbaston (Mr. Chamberlain), who was very anxious that the wishes of the Minister in regard to this Bill should be carried out to the full. He had an idea, as we all had, that the explanation given in the Bill was rather complicated and difficult to understand. Even at the present time it is not quite easy to grasp from the Bill the intentions of the Minister. So far as we understand them, and I think we are right, they simply mean that if in the clearing of a slum 100 people are removed, it is incumbent upon the local authority to build new housing accommodation for 100 people, but it does not of necessity follow that the 100 people removed from the slum will be the 100 people who will get into the new property. A process of decanting will proceed, and although it is possible that some people from the slum may on account of certain special conditions get into the new estate, the probability will be that the large majority of the slum people will not. My right hon. 327 Friend thought that the first essential was to see that the houses built upon the new estate as a result of the slum clearance were of an equal rent to the rents of houses in the vicinity built by the local authority, or, as the Amendment says:if there are no similar houses, then as may be in proportion to those charged for other houses in the neighbourhood, having regard to size, materials, and amenities, but such rents shall be subject to rebates in the case of individual tenants.Having formed a standard rent for the new estate, you proceed to move into the estate the people who have been removed from the cleared area. It is possible that from one particular district you may remove a man who is earning £6 or £7 a week, who had to get into an inferior house because he could not get a proper house elsewhere. The house that he may be in may be a suitable house for a person removed from the slum. Therefore this well-to-do artisan can be allowed to take one of the new houses at an economic rent, such as the rent that has been charged for a Wheatley or Chamberlain house in the district or for a house of an equal amenity value. You might find that another man from a slum will have a wife and seven children, and there will be no suitable house between that house and the estate. That family would of necessity be removed into a new estate house, but the man could not afford to pay the rent. In that case we bring in the second part of our Amendment, which allows the local authority to grant a rebate of rent. These rebates can be grantedin such manner and on such terms and conditions as the local authority may think fit.By our Amendment we give the local authority an absolutely free hand to decide how these rebates shall be fixed. They may give a rebate on account of the size of the family, a rebate of so much per child. They may give a rebate on account of the poverty of the family, or for any other reason which they think justifiable. The whole matter is left to the sole discretion of the local authority as a means of equalising the rent, and it would allow the people who come from the slums to be housed at a rent which they can afford. There is one definite proviso in the Amendment: 328there shall be paid by the local authority in each year into a rent pool a sum equal to the difference between the rents applicable to the houses, in accordance with this sub-section,The definite condition is, that a rent pool must be formed, and out of that rent pool any rebates which are given must be used for the reduction of the rent in cases of necessity. It may happen that in one district you may have a class of families in the estate houses to whom the rent rebate would be a very small matter. In that case, you would accumulate a sum of money which could be carried over to the following year, and in the following year, or it may be one or two years afterwards, you might have a different class of tenant to whom the rebate would be an absolute necessity, either on account of poverty or in regard to the size of the family. Then by using the rent pool you would be able to give these people a rebate sufficient to ensure that they would get these houses at a rent which they could afford to pay. The rent would be an economic rent, taking the whole scheme together.
On the assumption that my explanation is correct, and I imagine that it is, we think that that would be the best way to deal with this rather complicated subject. I understand that my hon. Friend the Member for Withington (Mr. E. D. Simon) and the hon. Lady the Member for the Combined English Universities (Miss Rathbone) wish to move an Amendment to our proposed Amendment, which specifies a little more definitely or distinctly how some of these rebates might be used. I shall be very pleased to accept that Amendment when it is moved. We think that our Amendment carries out the idea of the Minister in a way more easy to understand than the way outlined in the Bill, and it ensures that the whole of the benefit will get to the people who require it. If I carry the House with me—[Interruptian.] I am sorry to hear that interruption, because this is a serious attempt on our part to do what we can to help these people who cannot afford an economic rent, in order that they can get into decent houses, by giving them a rent rebate. It is proposed by the Government in their Clause, but in a very complicated manner, and in a way much more difficult to carry out and to estimate than is the case in our Amend- 329 ment.When an hon. Member opposite makes an interjection which is derogatory, to say the least of it, it shows that my arguments are not being appreciated by the other side.
I would like hon. Members opposite to understand that we are not moving this Amendment in A party spirit. We are simply moving it in a sincere desire that these poor people who are removed from the slums shall get decent suitable accommodation at a rent which they can afford. I commend the Amendment to the House on that ground alone. I hope that hon. Members opposite will forget for the moment that this Amendment has been moved from the Tory benches. Hon. Members on the Tory benches are just as interested in slum clearance as are hon. Members opposite. We have had a certain amount of experience. This Amendment was originally moved in Committee by the right hon. Member for Edgbaston, a man of vast experience. Therefore, hon. Members opposite may take it for granted that this is a serious effort to help the Government, and to see that the provisions which they require to be carried out are carried out. It is moved with the sincere desire that the poor people shall have the very best done for them that can be done under this Bill.
§ Lieut.-Colonel FREMANTLE
I beg to second the Amendment.
In doing so, I would ask my hon. Friend the Member for Royton (Dr. Davies) if he will join with me in asking you, Mr. Speaker, to allow us to correct a misprint in the Amendment as it stands on the Order Paper. The Amendment reads: "In line 16, at the end, insert." It should read "leave out from the end of line 16 to the end of line 24, and insert." The proposal in the Amendment is an alternative to that now in the Bill. That was the way in which it was moved in Committee. May we move it in that way now?
§ Mr. SPEAKER
If the Amendment that has been moved was not the right one or moved in the right place, I do not understand the difference.
§ Lieut.-Colonel FREMANTLE
The difference is that it really involves leaving out eight lines, and substituting an 330 alternative to those eight lines. It is not simply an insertion.
May I point out that the last word of the Amendment is the word "and." That was intended to be followed by the words which begin on line 25 of the Bill. That is the reason why my hon. and gallant Friend wishes to move to leave out the lines that precede line 25, namely, lines 17 to 24 inclusive, otherwise the Amendment would not read.
§ Lieut.-Colonel FREMANTLE
The proposal in our Amendment is not merely an alternative to the one in the Bill, but it gives definite precision to the proposal. It is useful for the local authority to have a definite proposal worked out. The answer that was given in Committee was that it is not necessary to confine the local authority to this method of a rent pool, and that the Minister wished to leave it open to the local authority to adopt what means they wished, recognising at the same time that the rent pool as proposed in this Amendment is the best way of working the scheme laid down in the Bill. There really is no other way of working it properly, and it would be a very definite improvement and a help in the interpretation of the Bill. The reasons for it have been so well set out in the speech proposed in the Amendment, that I do not wish to do more than second it.
§ Miss RATHBONE
I would like to move my Amendment to the proposed Amendment, namely, in line 6, after the word "tenants" to insert the wordswho, on account of dependent children or of their poverty cannot reasonably be expected to pay the full rent.
§ Mr. SPEAKER
I am afraid the hon. Member cannot move that yet. We have first to get the words out of the Clause. The proper place for her to do so will be on the Question, "That those words be there inserted."
§ Miss LAWRENCE
I am sorry to say that I must ask the House to reject this Amendment. Remember what it is that we are doing. We are giving the local authorities additional power by which they can reduce rent. We have had long discussions with the local authorities on this matter, and the discussions have proceeded on the lines that local authorities, while they must use the whole of the additional money for the reduction of rent, will make such reductions as they think right and proper having regard to the circumstances of their tenants. We say that the total rent they charge on their new estates must not exceed certain limits. Within those limits they may make such rebates as they think proper by the fixing of such rents as they think proper. The Amendment on the Paper is a very elaborate way of doing this very thing. The local authorities are to fix standard rents and make rebates. They are to suit the rents to the tenants. That is what most authorities and certainly all small authorities will do. When you come to the very large authorities, such as the London County Council, they will not want to suit the rents to their tenants, but to suit the tenants to the rents. They find it a much more convenient way. Sometimes they erect a block of especially cheap flats or of cheap houses, and from their waiting list they select their tenants whose economic circumstances demand a cheaper house. This may seem a little point, but it is not. If you are building on a big enough scale to say: "This block shall be cheap houses" and to send people who want a cheap house to them, you get certain advantages in administration. You know what the rents will be week by week and year by year, and you get the same kind of tenants living next door to each other. For the smaller authorities, such a plan is clearly impracticable. The London County Council is actually doing this kind of thing now in regard to its slum clearance schemes. It keeps things on a different rank altogether from its Wheatley houses and tries to keep them specially cheap.
There is a very great number of circumstances which a local authority may have to take into account in considering the needs of individual tenants. The 332 Amendment which is down on the Paper in the name of the hon. Member for the English Universities (Miss Rathbone) proposes that local authorities shall in all cases make rebates on particular grounds. It would exclude all other grounds for making them. It is very likely that the local authority will take into account the number of children. Almost certainly they will take into account a variety of circumstances, so great that the local authorities, generally, are determined to have a reasonably free hand in suiting each case to its particular circumstances. Nothing in the world can be more different in the character of the problems of administration than between such housing authorities as Manchester, Birmingham and London. You would hamper these authorities and spoil the Bill if you tried to get down too closely to the minutia: of administration. The local authorities wish to have reasonable freedom in distributing the extra money among their different classes of tenants.
I very much regret that the Parliamentary Secretary has maintained a rigid attitude upon the Amendment which has been moved by my hon. Friend. We had a longish discussion on this subject in Committee, and the Minister did go some way to meet us by amending the Clause as it originally stood in the Bill. As my hon. Friend pointed out at the time, however, this did not really go to the root of our objection, and I think the discussion has confirmed in every respect the criticism that we made on the Second Reading of the Bill, upon the system of attaching the subsidy to the person and not to the house. Look at the absurd position to which we are getting by this arrangement! Under paragraph (c), which we are discussing here, the rent is to be determined by the amount of subsidy, which is a subsidy per person and yet the persons are not the persons who are going to be in the house. Could anything be more absurd than that? The persons, in fact, in respect of whom the subsidy is going to be paid, are, it is contemplated, to go into other houses to which the subsidy cannot be made applicable. This Amendment of my hon. Friend is an endeavour to make the Bill work, as we believe the Minister really in his heart desires it to work.
333 The only argument that is put up against this is that certain local authorities do not like it, and that the local authorities ought to be allowed to have every possible freedom in deciding how they are to fix their rents. I am certainly au advocate of giving wide powers to local authorities, but I consider that when the State is going to step in and give a subsidy to local authorities, the State has a right to say how its bounty shall be used. You need not tie them down to every detail. When one considers what is the nominal purpose of this subsidy, I think we ought to see, in framing our Bill, that we are actually going to achieve our purpose. The hon. Lady said that paragraph (c) would carry out exactly what we propose in our Amendment, but this paragraph is giving latitude to local authorities to use the subsidy in quite a different way. There is nothing in the Bill to prevent a local authority taking the money which is to be received from the State in respect of slum clearance, a subsidy per person, and using it to reduce the rents of all the houses in the new building scheme by a flat rate. That is much the simplest and easiest way for the local authority. It has not got to take any trouble about whether a tenant fits the house or a house fits the tenant. Here is the house and here is the subsidy, which allows you to reduce the rent by so much, and it in attached to the house. There is nothing to prevent a local authority from making a flat rate deduction from the rents of these houses. It means that the benefit of the deduction will go to a number of tenants who really ought not to get it, who are not in such circumstances as will justify their having it. It means something more. If you divide the amount of subsidy over the number of houses, the average rate of deduction on flat rate is going to be very small. You are not going to have any sort of elasticity in dealing with these tenants whose circumstances are very difficult. The local authority will have no means of giving a larger subsidy where one is required, such as you could do under the Amendment which my hon. Friend proposed.
The Amendment which the hon. Member for the English Universities (Miss Rathbone) desires to make is one which, I am sure, my hon. Friend is ready to 334 accept, as I was ready to accept it in Committee. I do not agree with the hon. Lady opposite who says that there might be all sorts of other circumstances which would justify a rebate in subsidy besides those which are put in the Amendment. The latitude which the Minister of Health is leaving to the local authorities will probably be used by many smaller local authorities to distribute the subsidy in a way by means of a flat rate, and if they do that the Minister will find that it will really defeat the purpose of the Bill.
§ 8.0 p.m.
§ Mr. GREENWOOD
This is a restrictive Amendment which requires local authorities to deal with their property in one way and one way only. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Edgbaston (Mr. Chamberlain) has argued that you might get a reduction of rent in certain areas. I have no objection whatever to that. I can imagine the London County Council dealing with a large number of tenants and setting aside houses for people in a comfortable economic position, and there is no reason why that should not be done. I do not think that we ought to say to the local authority, "This is the way in which you should act and no other." I wish the hon. Member for Royton (Dr. Davies) had used the same arguments in 1023 that he has used to-day. While it may be right to lay down how the money ought to be used, there comes a point when the matter ought to be left to the discretion of the local authorities. I do not pretend that all local authorities are equally enlightened, but in this matter of housing we have handed over to them heavy responsibilities and we must trust them. On the other hand, to pin them down to one particular way of fixing rents is not a method which we are entitled to impose upon local authorities.
The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Edgbaston said that this was a matter of poverty. Nearly all these questions are matters of poverty in a sense. One case may be that of a working man earning what in ordinary circumstances would be regarded as a reasonable wage, but circumstances may arise under which he cannot maintain the standard of living which he would other-wise 335 wise have followed. In those circumstances is the local authority going to be allowed to say that, because the income is so much, this man's case will be ruled out? We have laid down that certain sums will be handed over for the relief of the tenants, and we are leaving it to the local authorities to decide the manner in which it shall be done. I see no reason why we should compel all local authorities to adopt a precise method without any latitude at all. There is all the difference in the world between excessive latitude and no latitude at all. This Amendment gives the local authority no latitude. We cannot approach local authorities in these days after their enormous experience and lay down in detail the precise method by which they have to deal with the problem of rent.
§ Lieut.-Colonel FREMANTLE
Paragraph (d) of the Amendment lays down that rebates may be granted to individual tenants "on such terms and conditions as the local authority may think fit."
§ Mr. GREENWOOD
The whole purpose of this Amendment is to get away from the wording of the Bill, and under the Bill the latitude of which I have spoken is given to the local authority. The purpose of the Amendment is to limit that latitude, and it determines the precise manner by which they must settle the rents for the houses under this scheme. Having given to local authorities very considerable powers, I think we ought to be satisfied to leave to them a reasonable amount of discretion, and allow them to adjust their rents to the needs of their own citizens. For these reasons, I hope the House will reject this Amendment.
§ Mr. SPEAKER
The hon. Member for the English Universities (Miss Rathbone) was told that she could move her Amendment on the Question being put, "That those words be there inserted." Owing to the way the Amendment has been put, the hon. Lady will not have an opportunity of moving her Amendment at all on that Question, but in order to allow the Amendment to be moved I will put the Question, "That the words proposed to be left out to the word 'the,' in line 19, stand part of the Bill," and that will allow the hon. Lady to move her Amendment.
§ Miss RATHBONE
If I move my Amendment, shall I be in order in speaking on the Amendment that has just been moved? My Amendment is a small one, and I wish to speak briefly upon it. I would also like to speak upon the main Amendment.
§ Mr. SPEAKER
The hon. Lady seems to wish to have it both ways. The Question I am putting is, "That the words proposed to be left out to the word 'the,' in line 19, stand part," and that will enable the hon. Lady to speak to the Amendment now before the House.
§ Miss RATHBONE
The object of my Amendment is a simple one. It is to bring out the main object of the rebates which are alike referred to in the Amendment of the hon. Member for Royton (Dr. Davies), and in the Clause as it now stands in the Bill. I move this Amendment on the ground that the Clause should apply to any individual tenant on account of his dependent children or of his poverty. Surely poverty and dependent children cover the whole of the ground. In the case cited by the Parliamentary Secretary of a man living at a long distance from his work, surely that fact can be taken into account by the local authority in considering whether he was to be considered so poor as to require a rebate upon his rent. The idea of putting those words in the Clause, instead of leaving them to be understood, is that the whole conception of a rebate for rents is comparatively new, and I believe the insertion of these words would relieve the minds of the local authority and assist them to understand what is the real intention of this Measure. When the Parliamentary Secretary was speaking on the Second Reading of this Measure and explaining Clause 23, she said that she thought local authorities would be able to grant rebates in respect of dependent children. I think she is assuming too much if she assumes that that object is clear from the wording of the Clause in the original Bill, or as it is now in Clause 26, where the word "rebate" has been inserted and there is no kind of recommendation as to the reason for the rebate.
Having said so much about the reason for inserting these particular words, may I say a little more about the reason for the whole Amendment? I submit that 337 this is really one of the most important Amendments which has been moved on this Bill. I have studied this Measure as closely as any hon. Member of the House, and I believe that the future success or failure of this Bill will be considerably influenced by the acceptance or rejection of these words. What is after all the whole object of this Bill? Its object is to secure lower rents nearer the capacity of the tenants to pay than the rents which are now charged under the Wheatley Act. The important consideration is whether what I may call the Greenwood Act is going to give better terms than the Wheatley Act. I know that depends upon the amount of the grant. What has misled the House is that the Wheatley grant is attached to the house and the Greenwood grant is attached to the unit displaced, and it is exceedingly difficult for Members of the House to see what is the difference and to what extent the Greenwood grant exceeds the Wheatley grant. We know that if you take the Exchequer contribution and add the rent contribution under the Wheatley Act it amounts to about 3s. 9d. per week. That is the amount of reduction of the economic rent under the Wheatley Act.
What is going to be the reduction under the Greenwood Act 4 On the Second Heading of this Bill we were told that if the money available under this Act was concentrated on only half the persons displaced it would amount to a reduction of about 2s. on the normal weekly rents. Is that contribution going to make a very great difference in getting poor workers out of the slums into new houses? I suggest that it is not going to make any difference at all. What guarantee have we that the local authorities will concentrate the benefit of the unit upon half the tenants? The Parliamentary Secretary was so determined to leave everything to the local authorities that she threw the reins on the back of the horse and allowed it to gallop wherever it liked. It is likely that the local authorities will follow the precedent of using the total amount of the grant for a reduction of rents, which will leave the average at about 1s. per house per week. In that Estimate I believe the Minister of Health was overestimating because if you work out how the Minister arrives at the sum of 2s. 338 per house it assumes that the average number per family was 4.5, and the Parliamentary Secretary has discovered from an analysis which she has made of the inhabitants of the slums that that is an over-estimate. I should not be surprised if we find that the average number of inhabitants per family in a slum is more than four persons. I know that in Liverpool, where a careful survey has been made. In the wards in which there is a large Catholic population the average number is something considerably less than 4.5.
The point of what I am saying, as bearing on this Amendment, is that at its very best we have to squeeze every drop of juice out of this desiccated summer orange of a Bill, and I do not think it is going to refresh to any great degree the parched throats of the dwellers in slums. The object of this Amendment is, I take it, to go further than any other Amendment which has been put down, and it will immeasurably improve the Bill by insisting that every drop of juice shall be squeezed out of it and shall be used for those who really need it. It insists that the money shall not be used in flat-rate reductions of rent—those flat-rate reductions that are so dear to the heart of every town clerk, every city treasurer, and every surveyor of corporation houses, because they are so beautifully simple to work out and collect. The object is that the money shall be used for the one purpose only of reducing rents for those individual tenants who need reductions, and who need them on the only ground on which they are likely to do so, namely, the ground either of child dependency or of poverty.
In future days, the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary may be somewhat sorry that they have not accepted this Amendment. It is dangerous to prophesy, but I will venture to make a prophecy. I believe that in two or three years' time it will be found that a very considerable proportion of the local authorities have used this Greenwood subsidy in just the way that the Ministry does not intend, and that none of us want who have really studied the matter closely, that is to say, simply in cutting down a little all the Wheatley rents. Some may not even do that, but may simply put a few extra embellishments 339 on to their houses. There is no provision in the Bill that compels them to apply the full value to the reduction of rents. On the other hand, if this Amendment were adopted, it would mean that, instead of having two sets of houses, perhaps side by side, one at Wheatley rents and the other at Wheatley rents minus 2s., we should have houses put up by the local authorities, whether under the Wheatley Act, the Chamberlain Act, or the Greenwood Act, at some reasonably worked out standard rent, and then, for the purpose of this particular Measure, we should be quite sure that all these rents were reduced by the method of rebates, so that the benefit would be entirely concentrated upon the greatest need. I suggest that hon. Members opposite are now unwise if they pour scorn on this Amendment, because they say that they fear gifts that come from the Greeks. If they want a classical quotation, I suggest that it would be more appropriate if they said to the Minister and to the Parliamentary Secretary:Mine own familiar friend in whom I trusted.I venture to think that they will find that this Measure will be a delusive Measure, a mirage, a will of the wisp; that it means holding out promises that are never really going to be fulfilled. It would make a very great difference if this Amendment were accepted, because it would be the beginning of a direct inducement to the local authorities to spend the money on the purpose upon which, after all, they are confessedly intended to spend it, and that is on the need of those tenants who require it.
I support the appeal of the hon. Member for the English Universities (Miss Rathbone) in favour of this Amendment, and I regret that the right hon. Gentleman cannot see his way to accept the Amendment. The very best thing in this Bill, the one new invention in the Bill which is going to help housing, is this invention of differential rents, that is to say, the basing of the rents, not, as in the Wheatley Act, on the house, but on the needs of the family. The whole value of this Amendment is that, although the Bill allows differential rents and allows the local authorities to have regard to the needs of the family, the 340 Amendment goes rather further, and almost makes it compulsory on local authorities to have for all their houses what may be called a standard rent, and then to concentrate the rent pool and give it to those who need it. I am convinced that this Amendment, while not quite compulsory, will have the effect, not so much in London or in Manchester, which the hon. Member was good enough to compliment, but in the more backward local authorities, of making them realise the real virtue of this Bill, namely, that it enables them to take the rather exiguous extra grant and use it in order to provide family houses at rents of 6s., 7s. and 8s., and not merely cut down the rent of the 10s. house to 9s., which, as the hon. Member said, would be almost useless. There has only been one argument against making differential rents almost compulsory in this way, and that is on the question of the freedom of the local authorities. I am a local authority man just as much as the right hon Gentleman, and, within limits, I agree that we should leave them all the freedom that we can. I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman really means. I am sorry that he is not here—to use that argument, but I have here a document entitled "Public Assistance Order, 1930," issued by the right hon. Gentleman three or four months ago, in which I find 67 pages of instructions in the utmost detail to Manchester, London, and every other local authority as to exactly how they are to treat people admitted to their Poor Law Institutions—how discipline is to be administered, the exact meals that every child should get, and gems like the following:That every casual shall be bathed as soon as practicable after his admission with clean warm water"—otherwise I suppose the right hon. Gentleman thought that we might bathe him in cold, dirty water, or not bathe him at all—unless there is reason to believe that bathing would be injurious to his health.If you are going to give Manchester instructions of that sort—
The hon. Lady has the courage to say that it is necessary. Here we have 67 pages of instructions as to how we are to treat our casuals. As one who was a member for 13 years of the 341 Manchester City Council I protest against this sort of treatment, and I am surprised that—
§ Sir K. WOOD
The hon. Member forgets the pledge that was given within three days of this Government coming into power that the whole of the conditions of the country would be changed.
§ Miss LAWRENCE
On a point of explanation. That story has grown like a green bay tree, and now it is said that we said that everything would be changed within three days. It is an absurdity.
§ Sir K. WOOD
May I say, as a point of explanation, in case I should be misunderstood, that I made no reference to any person? If anyone likes to put the cap on their head, they can, of course, do so.
If I may come back to the question on which I was speaking, I suggest that, talking of absurdity, it is really absurd to say that this Amendment would limit the freedom of these local authorities when we have 67 pages telling us in absolute detail everything that our Poor Law authorities should do. It is really absurd to take diametrically opposed action like that. One can hardly believe, in view of that Order, which really is an outrage on the great county boroughs, that the Minister objects to this Amendment, which does not limit the freedom of local authorities, but rather gives them guidance. I do not think that that guidance will in the least affect the behaviour of cities like Manchester, Birmingham and so on, but we know to our regret that there are slack local authorities. In those cases where the same rent is charged for all houses, the maximum benefit is certainly not obtained, but people who do not need the grant will continue to get it, while those who want 6s. or 7s. houses will not be able to get them. This Amendment does nothing more than give guidance to the local authorities. The argument about liberty is really one that cannot be seriously pressed, and I once more appeal to the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary to consider this Amendment favourably. I do not often support Conservative Amendments in this House, but I would ask the Government to realise that this Amendment is not in any sense a party Amendment, but one to make stronger and more effective the best 342 feature of the right hon. Gentleman's Bill, namely, that of differential rents. That is what the hon. Lady herself said she considered to be the right way of administering these provisions. The Amendment would give rather firmer guidance to the local authorities to administer them in that way; it would prevent waste of money, and would make available houses at low rents for those who need them, while it would do nothing to interfere with any reasonable liberty of the local authorities, and I still most sincerely hope that its acceptance will be considered.
§ Mr. McSHANE
The Minister has said we ought not to tie down the local authorities in one particular way and, in contradistinction to that, the last speaker has quoted -what the Minister said in connection with the transfer of Poor Law relief to the local authorities and, although that booklet to which he referred seemed on the face of it very outrageous, I can assure him that there is good, solid ground for the Minister having done that. The whole of that work was transferred to men and women most of whom knew nothing whatever of it. I speak from personal knowledge. Large numbers of the men and women who are now undertaking the work actually needed the whole of the instructions that the Minister gave. Coming to the Amendment itself, I do not think there is any doubt that every Member on these benches would in spirit support it, and if any of us thought that what the hon. Member and the hon. Lady for the combined Universities (Miss Rathbone) said was going to work out, that in fact local authorities would not give the rent rebates in the way indicated, I am certain very few on these benches would support the Minister in his proposal. But I feel a little doubt myself in relation to what may happen. One county borough that I have in mind whose name was notorious in 1926 for its mal-treatment of miners' wives and children in this respect, that they refused any relief of any kind. I certainly do not look with any happy feelings on that authority undertaking to work the Bill in the spirit the Minister suggested and I hope the hon. Lady will make it clear that, whatever happens under the operation of this Bill, reactionary authorities cannot use this merely to standardise rents without 343 giving the benefit to those for whom the Bill was originally introduced.
§ Captain GUNSTON
May I ask whether, before the Bill goes to another place, the Minister will have consultations with back-benchers, as they seem to realise that we are trying to get same useful Amendments.
§ Mr. CHARLES WILLIAMS
Surely we are to have an answer to the very important question that has been put by the hon. Lady opposite and also to the hon. Member who has just sat down. We are entitled to have a direct answer whether the Minister will try to meet the wishes that have been expressed from many sides of the House on an Amendment which has had support from practically every quarter. The Minister could give a sort of answer which would help
§ very considerably in facilitating a Bill of this kind. I was rather astonished that the Minister refused any help at all in the matter.
§ Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out to the word 'the,' in line 19, stand part of the Bill."
§ The House proceeded to a Division.
Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. Robert Young)
The hon. Lady heard Mr. Speaker's explanation, and if she has followed the way I am putting the Question, she will find that her Amendment is safeguarded.
§ The House divided: Ayes, 220; Noes, 120.345
|Division No. 420.]||AYES.||[8.33 p.m.|
|Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)||Egan, W. H.||Law, Albert (Bolton)|
|Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)||Forgan, Dr. Robert||Law, A. (Rosendale)|
|Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher||Freeman, Peter||Lawrence, Susan|
|Arnott, John||Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)||Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)|
|Attlee, Clement Richard||Gibbins, Joseph||Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)|
|Ayles, Walter||Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)||Leach, W.|
|Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)||Gillett, George M.||Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)|
|Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)||Gossling, A. G.||Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)|
|Barr, James||Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)||Lloyd, C. Ellis|
|Batey, Joseph||Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)||Logan, David Gilbert|
|Bellamy, Albert||Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne).||Longden, F.|
|Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood||Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)||Lowth, Thomas|
|Bennett, Capt. Sir E. N. (Cardiff C.)||Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)||Lunn, William|
|Benson, G.||Grundy, Thomas W.||MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)|
|Bevan, Aneurin (Ebbw Vale)||Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)||McElwee, A.|
|Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret||Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)||McEntee, V. L.|
|Bowen, J. W.||Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)||McKinlay, A.|
|Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.||Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)||MacLaren, Andrew|
|Broad, Francis Alfred||Harbord, A.||Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)|
|Bromfield, William||Hardie, George D.||March, S.|
|Brooke, W.||Harris, Percy A.||Marcus, M.|
|Brothers, M.||Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon||Markham, S. F.|
|Brown, C. W. E. (Notts. Mansfield)||Hastings, Dr. Somerville||Marshall, Fred|
|Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)||Haycock, A. W.||Mathers, George|
|Burgess, F. G.||Hayes, John Henry||Matters, L. W.|
|Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)||Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)||Messer, Fred|
|Caine, Derwent Hall-||Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)||Middleton, G.|
|Cameron, A. G.||Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)||Milner, Major J.|
|Cape, Thomas||Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)||Montague, Frederick|
|Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)||Herriotts, J.||Morgan, Dr. H. B.|
|Charleton, H. C.||Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)||Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)|
|Chater, Daniel||Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)||Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)|
|Church, Major A. G.||Hoffman, P. C.||Mort, D. L.|
|Clarke, J. S.||Hopkin, Daniel||Moses, J. J. H.|
|Cluse, W. S.||Horrabin, J. F.||Muggeridge, H. T.|
|Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.||Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)||Murnin, Hugh|
|Cocks, Frederick Seymour||Isaacs, George||Naylor, T. E.|
|Compton, Joseph||Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)||Noel Baker, P. J.|
|Cove, William G.||John, William (Rhondda, West)||Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)|
|Daggar, George||Johnston, Thomas||Palin, John Henry|
|Dalton, Hugh||Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.||Paling, Wilfrid|
|Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)||Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.||Palmer, E. T.|
|Denman, Hon. R. D.||Kelly, W. T.||Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)|
|Dickson, T.||Kennedy, Thomas||Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.|
|Dukes, C.||Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.||Phillips, Dr. Marion|
|Duncan, Charles||Kinley, J.||Pole, Major D. G.|
|Ede, James Chuter||Kirkwood, D.||Potts, John S.|
|Edmunds, J. E.||Lang, Gordon||Price, M. P.|
|Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)||Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George||Raynes, W. R.|
|Edwards, E. (Morpeth)||Lathan, G.||Richards, R.|
|Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)||Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)||Watkins, F. C.|
|Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)||Smith, Rennie (Penistone)||Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)|
|Ritson, J.||Smith, Tom (Pontefract)||Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)|
|Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs, Stretford)||Smith, W. R. (Norwich)||Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah|
|Romeril, H. G.||Snell, Harry||Wellock, Wilfred|
|Rosbotham, D. S. T.||Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip||Welsh, James (Paisley)|
|Rowson, Guy||Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)||Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)|
|Salter, Dr. Alfred||Sorensen, R.||Westwood, Joseph|
|Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)||Stamford, Thomas W.||Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)|
|Sanders, W. S.||Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)||Wilkinson, Ellen C.|
|Sawyer, G. F.||Sullivan, J.||Williams, David (Swansea, East)|
|Scrymgeour, E.||Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)||Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)|
|Sexton, James||Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)||Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)|
|Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)||Thurtle, Ernest||Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)|
|Shepherd, Arthur Lewis||Tinker, John Joseph||Wilson, J. (Oldham)|
|Sherwood, G. H.||Tout, W. J.||Wilson R. J. (Jarrow)|
|Shield, George William||Townend, A. E.||Winterton, G. E. (Leicester, Loughb'gh)|
|Shiels, Dr. Drummond||Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles||Wise, E. F.|
|Shillaker, J. F.||Turner, B.||Wright, W. (Rutherglen)|
|Shinwell, E.||Vaughan, D. J.||Young, R. S. (Islington, North)|
|Simmons, C. J.||Viant, S. P.|
|Sinkinson, George||Walkden, A. G.||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—|
|Sitch, Charles H.||Walker, J.||Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. William|
|Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)||Wallace, H. W.||Whiteley.|
|Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)||Wallhead, Richard C.|
|Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel||Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.||Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)|
|Albery, Irving James||George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)||Oman, Sir Charles William C.|
|Allen, W. E. D. (Balfast, W.)||Glassey, A. E.||O'Neill, Sir H.|
|Aske, Sir Robert||Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)||Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)|
|Atholl, Duchess of||Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.||Owen, H. F. (Hereford)|
|Balfour, George (Hampstead)||Greene, W. P. Crawford||Pilditch, Sir Philip|
|Beaumont, M. W.||Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)||Pybus, Percy John|
|Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)||Gunston, Captain D. W.||Ramsay, T. B. Wilson|
|Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman||Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)||Ramsbotham, H.|
|Birkett, W. Norman||Hanbury, C.||Rathbone, Eleanor|
|Bourne, Captain Robert Croft||Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)||Reid, David D. (County Down)|
|Brown, Ernest (Leith)||Haslam, Henry C.||Ross, Major Ronald D.|
|Burgin, Dr. E. L.||Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)||Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)|
|Butler, R. A.||Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.||Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)|
|Carver, Major W. H.||Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)||Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)|
|Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)||Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)||Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)|
|Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)||Hore-Belisha, Leslie||Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart|
|Chapman, Sir S.||Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.||Scott, James|
|Cobb, Sir Cyril||Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)||Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome|
|Colfox, Major William Philip||Hunter, Dr. Joseph||Simon, E. D. (Manch'ter, Withington)|
|Colville, Major D. J.||Hurd, Percy A.||Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John|
|Courtauld, Major J. S.||Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.||Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)|
|Cowan, D. M.||Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)||Somerset, Thomas|
|Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.||Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)||Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)|
|Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)||Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)||Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)|
|Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip||Kindersley, Major G. M.||Southby, Commander A. R. J.|
|Davies, Dr. Vernon||Lamb, Sir J. Q.||Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)|
|Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)||Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)||Titchfield, Major the Marquess of|
|Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)||Llewellin, Major J. J.||Todd Capt. A. J.|
|Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert||Lymington, Viscount||Train, J.|
|Duckworth, G. A. V.||McConnell, Sir Joseph||Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon|
|Dugdale, Capt. T. L.||Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)||Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert|
|Eden, Captain Anthony||MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.||Warrender, Sir Victor|
|Edmondson, Major A. J.||Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)||Williams, Charies (Devon, Torquay)|
|England, Colonel A.||Makins, Brigadier-General E.||Withers, Sir John James|
|Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)||Mander, Geoffrey le M.||Womersley, W. J.|
|Everard, W. Lindsay||Merriman, Sir F. Boyd||Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley|
|Fermoy, Lord||Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)||Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton|
|Fison, F. G. Clavering||Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)|
|Foot, Isaac,||Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—|
|Forestier-Walker, Sir L.||Muirhead, A. J.||Sir Frederick Thomson and Sir|
§ Miss RATHBONE
On a point of Order. I am sorry, but I am afraid that I do not understand the position. Do I now move the Amendment standing in my name, seeing that the Amendment moved by the hon. Member for Royton (Dr. Davies) has been defeated?
§ Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER
Mr. Speaker informed the hon. Lady that he was going to call the Amendment on the Order Paper, and the Amendment will now be—In page 26, line 19, to insert the words:any individual tenant who on account of his dependent children or of his poverty cannot reasonably be expected to pay the full rent.
§ Miss RATHBONE
I did not understand. I thought that Mr. Speaker was referring to a manuscript Amendment, because he told me privately that he was going to select a manuscript Amendment and not the one on the Paper.
§ Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER
For the information of the hon. Lady, I wish to draw attention to what we have already done. We have passed certain words down to the word "the" in line 19, and therefore the Amendment is to leave out the words "the tenant of any house," and insert the words upon the Order Paper.
§ Miss RATHBONE
I beg to move, in page 26, line 19, to leave out the words "the tenant of any house," and to insert instead thereof, the words:any individual tenant who on account of his dependent children or of his poverty cannot reasonably be expected to pay the full rent.The case for the Amendment is precisely the same as the case for inserting similar words in regard to the Amendment we have just discussed in the name of the hon. Member for Royton (Dr. Davies). I think that it is all the more important to insert the words in the Clause as it now stands, so as to draw the attention of the local authorities more fully to the reasons for which they are asked to grant rebates. They are now being given the choice between either a system of rebates or a fiat rate reduction of rent. It is clear that, owing to the unfamiliarity of the idea of rebates in the minds of local authorities, many of them will fasten on to the alternative now allowed them under the Clause of reducing rents by a flat rate all round, unless reasons for the rebates are suggested to their minds by the insertion of the words which I propose.
§ They make it clear that the idea is to concentrate the value of the subsidy on the tenants who need it for either of these two reasons—on account of child dependency or on the ground of poverty. I would remind the House that child dependency before the War was accountable for just three-fourths of the cases of primary poverty, but now unemployment is responsible for the largest number of cases. Still child dependency is the next greatest cause of primary poverty. Therefore, you have, in these two reasons—child dependency and poverty—conditions which really cover the whole ground.
I beg to second the Amendment.
I would point out to the right hon. Gentleman and to the hon. Lady opposite that, this Amendment, which will have much the same effect as the other Amendment, has not come from a tainted source, and I hope that they will accept it.
§ Miss LAWRENCE
Like the hon. Member for the English Universities (Miss Rathbone) I do not wish to go over again the ground already discussed. I will only say this, that this Amendment appears to unduly restrict the liberty of local authorities. Some authorities, like the London County Council, may have nothing to do with rebates, and may also have a specially low rent for houses. There may be other causes besides mere poverty or children which may call for rebate. I am afraid I cannot accept the Amendment.
§ Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."
§ The House divided: Ayes, 204; Noes, 115.351
|Division No. 421.]||AYES.||[8.48 p.m.|
|Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)||Broad, Francis Alfred||Cocks, Frederick Seymour|
|Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)||Bromfield, William||Compton, Joseph|
|Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher||Brooke, W.||Cove, William G.|
|Arnott, John||Brothers, M.||Daggar, George|
|Attlee, Clement Richard||Brown, C. W. E. (Notts, Mansfield)||Dalton, Hugh|
|Ayles, Walter||Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)||Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)|
|Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)||Burgess, F. G.||Denman, Hon. R. D.|
|Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)||Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)||Dickson, T.|
|Barr, James||Cameron, A. G.||Dukes, C.|
|Batey, Joseph||Cape, Thomas||Duncan, Charles|
|Bellamy, Albert||Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)||Ede, James Chuter|
|Benn, Rt. Hon. Wedgwood||Charleton, H. C.||Edmunds, J. E.|
|Bennett, Capt. Sir E. N. (Cardiff C.)||Chater, Daniel||Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)|
|Benson, G.||Church, Major A. G.||Edwards, E. (Morpeth)|
|Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret||Clarke, J. S.||Egan, W. H.|
|Bowen, J. W.||Cluse, W. S.||Forgan, Dr. Robert|
|Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.||Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.||Gardner, J. P. (Hammersmith, N.)|
|Gibbins, Joseph||McElwee, A.||Shinwell, E.|
|Gillett, George M.||McEntee, V. L.||Simmons, C. J.|
|Gossling, A. G.||McKinlay, A.||Sinkinson, George|
|Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)||Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)||Sitch, Charles H.|
|Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)||March, S.||Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)|
|Greene, W. P. Crawford||Marcus, M.||Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)|
|Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)||Marshall, Fred||Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)|
|Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)||Mathers, George||Smith, Rennie (Penistone)|
|Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)||Matters, L. W.||Smith, Tom (Pontefract)|
|Grundy, Thomas W.||Messer, Fred||Smith, W. R. (Norwich)|
|Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)||Middleton, G.||Snell, Harry|
|Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)||Milner, Major J.||Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip|
|Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)||Montague, Frederick||Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)|
|Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)||Morgan, Dr. H. B.||Sorensen, R.|
|Harbord, A.||Morrison, Herbert (Hackney, South)||Stamford, Thomas W.|
|Hardie, George D.||Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)||Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)|
|Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon||Mort, D. L.||Sutton, J. E.|
|Haycock, A. W.||Moses, J. J. H.||Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)|
|Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)||Muggeridge, H. T.||Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)|
|Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)||Murnin, Hugh||Thurtle, Ernest|
|Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)||Naylor, T. E.||Tinker, John Joseph|
|Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)||Noel Baker, P. J.||Tout, W. J.|
|Herriotts, J.||Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)||Townend, A. E.|
|Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)||Palin, John Henry||Turner, B.|
|Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)||Paling, Wilfrid||Vaughan, D. J.|
|Hoffman, P. C.||Palmer, E. T.||Viant, S. P.|
|Hopkin, Daniel||Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)||Walkden, A. G.|
|Horrabin, J. F.||Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.||Walker, J.|
|Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)||Phillips, Dr. Marion||Wallace, H. W.|
|Isaacs, George||Pole, Major D. G.||Wallhead, Richard C.|
|Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)||Potts, John S.||Watkins, F. C.|
|John, William (Rhondda, West)||Price, M. P.||Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)|
|Johnston, Thomas||Raynes, W. R.||Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)|
|Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.||Richards, R.||Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah|
|Kelly, W. T.||Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)||Wellock, Wilfred|
|Kennedy, Thomas||Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)||Welsh, James (Paisley)|
|Kinley, J.||Ritson, J.||Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)|
|Kirkwood, D.||Romeril, H. G.||Westwood, Joseph|
|Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George||Rosbotham, D. S. T.||Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)|
|Lathan, G.||Rowson, Guy||Whiteley, William (Blaydon)|
|Law, Albert (Bolton)||Salter, Dr. Alfred||Wilkinson, Ellen C.|
|Law, A. (Rosendale)||Samuel, H. Walter (Swansea, West)||Williams, David (Swansea, East)|
|Lawrence, Susan||Sanders, W. S.||Williams, Dr, J. H. (Llanelly)|
|Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)||Sawyer, G. F.||Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)|
|Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)||Scrymgeour, E.||Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)|
|Leach, W.||Sexton, James||Wilson, J. (Oldham)|
|Lee, Frank (Derby, N. E.)||Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)||Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)|
|Lloyd, C. Ellis||Shepherd, Arthur Lewis||Wright, W. (Rutherglen)|
|Logan, David Gilbert||Sherwood, G. H.||Young, R. S. (Islington, North)|
|Lowth, Thomas||Shield, George William|
|Lunn, William||Shiels, Dr. Drummond||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—|
|MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)||Shillaker, J. F.||Mr. A. Barnes and Mr. Hayes.|
|Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel||Everard, W. Lindsay||Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.|
|Albery, Irving James||Ferguson, Sir John||Kindersley, Major G. M.|
|Allen, W. E. D. (Belfast, W.)||Fermoy, Lord||Lamb, Sir J. Q.|
|Aske, Sir Robert||Fison, F. G. Clavering||Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)|
|Balfour, George (Hampstead)||Foot, Isaac||Llewellin, Major J. J.|
|Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)||Forestier-Walker, Sir L.||Lymington, Viscount|
|Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman||Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.||McConnell, Sir Joseph|
|Birkett, W. Norman||George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)||Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)|
|Brown, Ernest (Leith)||Glassey, A. E.||MacRobert, Rt. Hon. Alexander M.|
|Burgin, Dr. E. L.||Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)||Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)|
|Butler, R. A.||Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)||Makins, Brigadier-General E.|
|Carver, Major W. H.||Gunston, Captain D. W.||Mander, Geoffrey le M.|
|Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)||Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)||Markham, S. F.|
|Chapman, Sir S.||Hanbury, C.||Merriman, Sir F. Boyd|
|Cobb, Sir Cyril||Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)||Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)|
|Colville, Major D. J.||Haslam, Henry C.||Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)|
|Courtauld, Major J. S.||Hastings, Dr. Somerville||Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)|
|Cowan, D. M.||Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)||Muirhead, A. J.|
|Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.||Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.||Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)|
|Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)||Herbert, Sir Dennis (Hertford)||Oman, Sir Charles William C.|
|Davies, Dr. Vernon||Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)||O'Neill, Sir H.|
|Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)||Hore-Belisha, Leslie||Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)|
|Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)||Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.||Owen, H. F. (Hereford)|
|Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert||Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)||Pilditch, Sir Philip|
|Duckworth, G. A. V.||Hunter, Dr. Joseph||Pybus, Percy John|
|Dugdale, Capt. T. L.||Hurd, Percy A.||Ramsay, T. B. Wilson|
|Eden, Captain Anthony||Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.||Ramsbotham, H.|
|Edmondson, Major A. J.||Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)||Rathbone, Eleanor|
|England, Colonel A.||Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)||Ross, Major Ronald D.|
|Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)||Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)||Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)|
|Russell, Richard John (Eddisbury)||Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)||Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)|
|Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)||Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)||Withers, Sir John James|
|Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)||Southby, Commander A. R. J.||Womersley, W. J.|
|Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart||Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)||Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley|
|Scott, James||Titchfield, Major the Marquess of||Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton|
|Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome||Todd, Capt. A. J.|
|Simon, E. D. (Manch'ter, Withington)||Train, J.||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—|
|Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John||Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon||Sir Frederick Thomson and Sir|
|Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)||Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert||George Penny.|
|Somerset, Thomas||Warrender, Sir Victor|
Question put, and agreed to.
§ Miss LAWRENCE
I beg to move, in page 26, line 39, to leave out the first word "the."
Hon. Members will see on the Order Paper a very long list of Amendments in the name of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health. I want to say that they are all of a formal and drafting character and that no discourtesy to the House is involved if I move them formally without a speech, although I shall be delighted to give any explanation which may be necessary to the House.
§ Sir K. WOOD
That is a very reasonable suggestion, and if the Parliamentary Secretary will tell us when she comes to any Amendment which she thinks is other than a drafting Amendment or purely formal, I think that that will be sufficient.
§ Mr. C. WILLIAMS
This Amendment appears to be due entirely to gross carelessness in the drafting of the Bill. There can be no other reason for it. [Interruption.] If hon. Members opposite who interrupt have another reason to put forward, they are entitled to get up and state it. Without any explanation whatever we are asked by the Parliamentary Secretary to pass the Amendment. If Ministers had known their job all this work would have been done in Committee. Has the Amendment any bearing on the rest of the Bill? Where I find it necessary to put questions which were not answered during the Committee stage, I am sure that the Minister would wish me to put than and will be prepared to answer them.
§ Amendment agreed to.