CLAUSE 64.—(Date of operation of this part of this Act.) (Hansard, 6 December 1932)

§ The ATTORNEY-GENERAL
I beg to move, in page 73, line 6, to leave out the word "thirty-two," and to insert instead thereof the word "thirty-three."

§ Sir K. VAUGHAN-MORGAN
May I ask for a little information on this?

§ The ATTORNEY-GENERAL
This is to enable, as the Amendment seems to suggest, different times at which different provisions of the Bill will come into operation.

§ The ATTORNEY-GENERAL
I beg to move, in page 73, line 8, at the end, to insert the words: and different days may be fixed for different purposes and different provisions of this Part of this Act.

§ Mr. C. WILLIAMS
This Amendment deals with the different dates which may be fixed by the Minister, but as the Government are more or less pledged to uniformity, why should there not be one date for the whole of these things There may be reasons, but it is a little curious that a Government which has made such an absolute idol of uniformity should be inserting this Amendment in which there are different dates. Thanks to the Government, I am rapidly arriving at a. state of some confusion as to whether the Government really are so fond of uniformity. The Committee is entitled to some adequate explanation as to why there should be different dates. Are they to have different dates for the North and South of London or for the East and West or for different localities?

§ The ATTORNEY-GENERAL
This is not at all an unfamiliar provision in a Bill of a comprehensive character dealing with a number of subjects. I am sure 1547 my hon. Friend's acquaintance with the methods of this House would enable him to quote half-a-dozen instances where this has been the procedure. It is thought desirable to empower the Minister to bring different parts of the Bill into operation at different times. I cannot say more than that, and I think the Committee must trust the Minister and myself when I say that it may be necessary, and I see no reason why the Minister should not be given that power. It has not been found at all inconvenient in other legislation to which we have all been parties in this House.

§ Mr. C. WILLIAMS
As far as the Attorney-General is concerned, I have implicit trust in him, but although I might conceivably find other cases of this kind of thing, it is not necessarily good. I understood that uniformity was everything. Now that the right hon. Gentleman has begun to give way on this, it helps us enormously in our case against the whole Bill.