CLAUSE 263.—(Interpretation, etc.) (Hansard, 8 April 1935)

§ The SOLICITOR-GENERAL
I beg to, move, in page 148, line 40, after "expressions," to insert "'All-India Service.'"
This is the first of a series of purely drafting Amendments. This is an interpretation Clause, and the first part of Sub-section (1) provides, in effect, that certain descriptions of certain Services shall have the same meaning as they have in the classification rules at present in force. Since this Clause was drafted certain references have been introduced into the Bill in the form of Amendments, among them the Railway Services Class I and Class II and the All-India Services. Those expressions ought to be covered by the first part of Sub-section (1), and given the same meaning as they have at present, and these Amendments merely adapt the first interpretation paragraph to deal with expressions which are now to be found in the Bill.

§ The SOLICITOR-GENERAL
I beg to move, in page 149, line 11, to leave out Sub-section (2).
The Sub-section which it is proposed to omit reads: The Rules Publication Act, 1893, shall not apply to any rules or regulations made under this Part of this Act. I do not know that this Amendment will effect any great alteration in the practice at any rate which has been pursued in the past. The Rules Publication Act, 1893, enshrines the provisions which Parliament thought fit and proper to apply at the date when the Act was passed, and they have not since been amended. It draws a distinction between rules such 911 as those which were made in Clause 235, and rules made under express provisions in a Statute, and provides in those cases for their publication in the "Gazette" and for representations being made, and the rule making authority, in this case the Secretary of State, has to consider the representations, and there are also time limits and certain provisions for dealing with emergencies. My right hon. Friend is quite prepared that these provisions shall apply by Statute, as they will if this Amendment is accepted and the Sub-section is deleted, to the rules which fall to be made under this Chapter. So far as other rules are concerned, under the Rules Publication Act they have to be published in the statutory rules and orders; and there, again, we have no objection to that. The Committee may ask why this Sub-section was ever put into the Bill. The reason was that it was felt some expense might be saved in dealing with minor rules if we had not to go through the various forms of publication which the Rules Publication Act provides. But representations have been made on the subject, and we have no sort of objection to all the safeguards of the Act being applied to rules of one or the other character which may be required to be made under this Bill. In any case, the saving of expense would have been very small, and we think it better that the Act should apply.

§ Sir B. PETO
I am very glad that the Government have moved in this matter more or less of their own volition. Those of us who have taken more interest in the Bill than some Members may feel a little remiss at not having observed this particular Sub-section. I think it would have been very undesirable that it should have remained in the Bill, even if it was put in with the possibility of saving extra expense. The House passed the Rules Publication Act 38 years ago and I think it is a very good thing that the benefits of that Act should be preserved when any alterations are being made in the rules,.governing the conditions of service of any body of servants of the State.

§ Sir S. HOARE
I beg to move, in page 149, line 16, after "India," to insert: 912 (a) include references to persons who, after service in India, Burma, or Aden, retired from the service of His Majesty before the commencement of Part III of this Act; (b). This is really a, drafting Amendment, to make it quite clear as in Clauses 12 (d) and 52 (c), that these various safeguards cover officials who have already retired from the Services. It has been made quite clear in another part of the Bill, and I want to make it quite clear in this Clause as well.

§ Mr. ATTLEE
Is there any point of substance in this Amendment, or is it only a correction? In the Clause as originally drafted it was only "Burma or Aden," and in the Amendment it becomes "Burma or Aden."

§ Sir S. HOARE
It is only a, correction. There is no point of substance.