§
Subsequent Lords Amendment, in page 13, line 17, at the end, to insert,
(e) in the application of section six of this Act, for the words 'thirteen pounds' the words twenty-six pounds five shillings' shall be substituted",
§ disagreed to.
§ Subsequent Lords Amendment, in page 13, line 20, to leave out "appointed", agreed to.
1405§ FIRST SCHEDULE.—(Possession or ejectment without proof of alternative accommodation.)
§ Lords Amendment: In page 18, line 25, leave out "either."
Sir H. YOUNGI beg to move, "That, this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment."
I move this in consequence of the decision already come to by the House and also to lead up to the alternative suggestion to be incorporated in the Schedule.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ Subsequent Lords Amendment: In page 18, line 29, leave out from the word "employment" to the end of line 36, disagreed to.
Sir H. YOUNGI beg to move, as an Amendment to the words so restored to the Bill, in line 36, at the end, to insert the words,
or as an estate workman on the maintenance and repair of buildings, plant, or equipment of agricultural holdings comprised in the estate.
§ 12.23 a.m.
§ Mr. BUCHANANIs it competent for the Minister to move an Amendment which is not an Amendment to the Lords Amendment As this Amendment is moved to the Schedule, and not as an Amendment to the Lords Amendments, is it in order at this stage to move it?
§ Sir F. FREMANTLEIt is already covered by a Lords Amendment.
§ Mr. BUCHANANI am asking Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SPEAKERIt is quite in Order, because the right hon. Gentleman has moved to disagree with Amendments and consequential Amendments which the Lords have inserted. I understand it is in consequence of those Amendments that he is now moving this Amendment in lieu thereof.
Sir H. YOUNGThat is so. The Lords Amendment was to leave out paragraph (g ii). My Amendment is to re-insert the paragraph with certain words added. It is therefore an Amendment to the Lords Amendment.
§ 12.25 a.m.
§ Mr. BUCHANANThe right hon. Gentleman is proposing an Amendment to the Schedule. I cannot see its relationship to the Amendment put down in 1406 another place, and it does not seem to me to be in Order here.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member will recollect that in the Lords Amendments on the last Bill we did leave out certain Clauses, and the Minister then in charge moved an Amendment of his own in lieu of the ones left out. This is exactly the same process.
§ Mr. BUCHANANThat is what I challenge. It is not the same. This is a new principle. What the Minister is now moving is to put in certain classes of people, estate workers, etc., and that is not raised by the Lords Amendment. The Minister is raising an entirely new point not covered by any of the Lords Amendments. Nobody can show me a single Amendment which raises this point. I cannot see the connection of the point he is now raising with anything the Lords have done.
§ 12.27 a.m.
Sir H. YOUNGThe hon. Member is quite wrong. It is no doubt due to the fact that he has not the Amendments before him. We are dealing with the Lords Amendment on page 18, line 29, to leave cut from "employment" to the end of line 36. If he glances at the consequence of that he will see that the Lords Amendment leaves out the whole of sub-paragraph 2 of paragraph. (g). I moved to disagree with the Lords Amendment, and to replace that subparagraph with the addition of certain words. My Amendment therefore strictly stands in the form of an Amendment to the Lords Amendment.
§ 12.29 a.m.
§ Mr. MAXTONApart from the question of procedure about which I am still in very grave doubt, there arises the whole question of the House being asked to discuss now an Amendment to the Lords Amendment on an issue which was never before us when the Bill was debated in this House, and which is before us only on a very hurried repetition of it by the Minister. We are unable to see the thing in cold print, as it is not on the Paper. It is not treating the business seriously at all. The Minister has been very candid. He told us that the last Amendment opened too wide a field, and he is doing something which he tells us limits what the Lords are proposing but which is wider than what this House agreed to 1407 when the Bill left us. Yet we have to make up our minds about this at half-past twelve in the morning without the actual thing before us. Personally, I am not going to do it. It may be right or it may be wrong; I cannot say without having looked at the antecedent changes and this consequential one. I am going to vote against the proposal. I thing it is preposterous at this hour of the morning that a Government, which has not been unduly impeded in their work, should come to us in this way and ask us in five minutes to approve this. It is a long time since this Bill went to the Lords and we finished with it. Why could not the Lords have had all this done before and the Minister have had his negotiations with them before, because presumably what he is asking this House to insert to-day is something that the Lords themselves should insert It is not right or proper or treating the House decently, and I for one dissent very strongly from it and shall vote against this proposal.
§ 12.32 a.m.
§ Mr. GREENWOODI have two objections to this Amendment. The first the objection put by my hon. Friend who has just spoken. This is a matter of some considerable substance, and I think it is due to the House that it should have been put on the paper and not moved in manuscript form. After all, this is not a matter of urgency like the World Economic Conference. There is still some time to run and it should have been possible for the Government to have come to the House and given us an opportunity to see the actual form of the words which the right hon. Gentleman has moved in lieu of the Lords Amendment.
My second objection is an objection of substance. When this Bill was considered in Committee, on this side of the House we moved to leave out part of paragraph (g) of the First Schedule, because we thought it was unduly favourable to the landlord and would be likely to have unfortunate consequences to tenants. Now the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman is not to limit the number of people who are going to come under its operation but actually to extend them. Because it will enlarge the number of people whose housing accom- 1408 modation is put in peril, and because it will affect and enlarge the powers of the landlords, I am afraid those of us on this side of the House must vote against it. We shall do so on two grounds first, that we think the House should have had a proper opportunity of seeing this Amendment in print, and, secondly, we object to it on principle.
§ Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTEWill the right hon. Gentleman say whether his Amendment would include woodmen?
Sir H. YOUNGIf I may reply to the question of the last speaker first, my advice is that as a matter of fact it is not necessary specifically to include woodmen, because they would be included under the existing Act. I should like to say a word of personal explanation regarding what I feel is the legitimate stress which has been laid on this manuscript Amendment being considered at this time of night. I am not responsible for it being taken at this time of night.
§ Mr. BUCHANANNeither are we.
Sir H. YOUNGWe could not foresee that it would come on at this time of night, but it so happens that it has been inevitable that we have not had time to get the Amendment on the Paper. I did take what steps could be taken to inform the Opposition.
§ Mr. BUCHANANNo.
Sir H. YOUNGI am sorry if it did not reach the hon. Member. I took such steps as could be taken to explain to the Opposition what was the actual proposal that would be made. I realise that that is not a substitute for having it on the Paper, but in the circumstances it could not be put on the Paper. This is, however, by no means an unusual procedure. On the contrary, it is a common occurrence when we are dealing with Lords Amendments that manuscript Amendments should be proposed by the Government. I have done my best to explain matters to the House, and in the circumstances I trust the House will be able to come to a decision on the matter.
§ 12.37 a.m.
§ Mr. BUCHANANI want to say that on this matter the Government have not made out a case for putting this Amendment down in manuscript. Frankly, we did not know this was coming on as a manuscript Amendment nor have we had 1409 the same courteous treatment as other interests have had. The Government should have known that they would have reached this Bill at this time, because we have only just disposed of the previous Bill. [Interruption.] The hon. Member who is interrupting has many capacities. but he is not Deputy-Speaker yet. Let him do it with manners and not with his hands in his pockets. I was saying that if we had known that this Bill was coming on we would have opposed many Amendments on the Agricultural Marketing Bill and by that means would have used our constitutional powers to delay this Measure. Had we known it we would not have allowed this Measure to have come on at this time of night. When we made inquiries we were assured that no alteration would be made in the Bill at all. I inquired and was told that there were no alterations of
| Division No. 270.] | AYES. | [12.40 a.m. |
| Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel | Greaves-Lord. Sir Walter | Moreing, Adrian C. |
| Adams, Samuel Vyvyan T. (Leeds, W.) | Greene, William P. C. | Nation, Brigadier-General J. J. H. |
| Agnew, Lieut.-Com. P. G. | Grigg, Sir Edward | Nicholson, Godfrey (Morpeth) |
| Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craig le M. | Grimston, R. V. | O'Donovan, Dr. William James |
| Banks, Sir Reginald Mitchell | Guy, J. C. Morrison | Petherick, M. |
| Barclay-Harvey, C. M. | Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H. | Pike, Cecil F. |
| Bateman, A. L. | Hanley, Dennis A. | Procter, Major Henry Adam |
| Beaumont, M. W. (Bucks., Aylesbury) | Harbord, Arthur | Ramsay, T. B. W. (Western Isles) |
| Benn, Sir Arthur Shirley | Harvey, George (Lambeth, Kenningt'n) | Rea, Walter Russell |
| Boulton, W. W. | Heligers, Captain F. F. A. | Reed, Arthur C. (Exeter) |
| Bowyer, Capt. Sir George E. W. | Hore-Belisha, Leslie | Reid, William Allan (Derby) |
| Braithwaite, J. G. (Hillsborough) | Hornby, Frank | Rhys, Hon. Charles Arthur U. |
| Broadbent, Colonel John | Howard, Tom Forrest | Ross Taylor, Walter (Woodbridge) |
| Brocklebank, C. E. R. | Howitt, Dr. Alfred B. | Ruggles-Brise, Colonel E. A. |
| Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham) | Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.) | Runge, Norah Cecil |
| Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T. | Inskip, Rt. Hon. Sir Thomas W. H. | Russell, Hamer Field (Sheffield, B'tside) |
| Burnett, John George | Jesson, Major Thomas E. | Rutherford, John (Edmonton) |
| Campbell, Sir Edward Taswell (Brmly) | Johnstone, Harcourt (S. Shields) | Sandeman, Sir A. N. Stewart |
| Caporn, Arthur Cecil | Ker, J. Campbell | Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D. |
| Christie, James Archibald | Kerr, Hamilton W. | Skelton, Archibald Noel |
| Cochrane, Commander Han. A. D. | Law, Richard K. (Hull, S.W.) | Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam) |
| Colfox, Major William Philip | Leckie, J. A. | Sotheron-Estcourt, Captain T. E. |
| Colman, N. C. D. | Lindsay, Noel Ker | Spencer, Captain Richard A. |
| Conant, R. J. E. | Llewellin, Major John J. | Spens, William Patrick |
| Cook, Thomas A. | Lyons, Abraham Montagu | Stanley, Lord (Lancaster, Flyde) |
| Cooper, A. Duff | MacAndrew, Capt. J. O. (Ayr) | Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray F. |
| Courthope, Colonel Sir George L. | McConnell, Sir Joseph | Sutcliffe, Harold |
| Craven-Ellis, William | MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw) | Thomson, Sir Frederick Charles |
| Crookehank. Col. C. de Windt (Bootle) | Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.) | Thorp, Linton Theodore |
| Cruddas, Lieut.-Colonel Bernard | McKie, John Hamilton | Touche, Gordon Cosmo |
| Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil) | McLean, Major Sir Alan | Turton, Robert Hugh |
| Dixon, Rt. Hon. Herbert | Macquisten, Frederick Alexander | Vaughan-Morgan, Sir Kenyon |
| Duncan, James A. L. (Kensington, N.) | Manningham-Buller. Lt.-Col. Sir M. | Ward, Lt.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull) |
| Eastwood, John Francis | Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R. | Wells, Sydney Richard |
| Emrys-Evans. P. V. | Martin, Thomas B. | Weymouth, Viscount |
| Entwistle, Cyril Fullard | Mayhew, Lieut.-Colonel John | Whiteside, Borras Noel H. |
| Fleming, Edward Lascelles | Merriman, Sir F. Boyd | Williams, Herbert G. (Croydon, S.) |
| Ford. Sir Patrick J | Mills, Major J. D. (New Forest) | Wills, Wilfrid D. |
| Fremantle, Sir Francis | Milne, Charles | Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (S'v'noake) |
| Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John | Mitchell, Harold P. (Betf'd & Chlsw'k) | |
| Goldle, Noel B. | Holton, A. Hugh Elsdale | TELLERS FOR THE AYES.— |
| Graves, Marjorie | Moore, Lt.-Col. Thomas C. R. (Ayr) | Sir George Penny and Dr. Morris- |
| Jones. |
| NOES. | ||
| Winfield, John William | Greenwood, Rt. Hon. Arthur | Milner, Major James |
| Buchanan, George | Jenkins, Sir William | Smith, Tom (Normanton) |
| Cape, Thomas | Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George | Tinker, John Joseph |
| Crippn, Sir Stafford | Macdonald, Gordon (Ince) | Williams, Edward John (Ogmore) |
| Daggar, George | McEntee, Valentine L. | Williams, Thomas (York, Don Valley) |
| Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton) | Mainwaring, William Henry | |
| Edwards, Charles | Maxton, James | TELLERS FOR THE NOES.— |
| Mr. John and Mr. Duncan Graham. |
§ substance to be made at all, and on that we allowed the other Bill to go through. Now we have this Amendment which is one of substance. The Minister says it has been done in the past, but Governments have never put down Amendments of this substance in this form before. I say the procedure is shocking. It is bringing within the ambit of the Bill a large number of men with their wives and families and affecting them in a most reactionary fashion. If it had been a group of rich people who were affected, the great mass of hon. Members in this House would have never have stood such a procedure. It is throwing contempt on every decent procedure of this House.
§ Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."
§ The House divided: Ayes, 123; Noes, 19.
1411§ Remaining Lords Amendments agreed to.
§ Ordered, "That a Committee be appointed to draw up reasons to be assigned to the Lords for disagreeing to certain of their amendments to the Bill."
§ Committee nominated of Mr. T. Williams, Mr. C. Edwards, Mr. Brockle-bank, Sir Alan McLean and Sir H. Young.
§ Three to be the quorum.—[Sir H. Young.]
§ To withdraw immediately.
§ Reason for disagreeing to certain of the Lords Amendments reported, and agreed to.
§ To be communicated to the Lords.—[Sir H. Young.]