HC Deb 10 April 1935 vol 300 cc1254-6

Amendment made: In page 178, line 26, after "to," insert: and to the dependants of, persons who are or have been.— [Mr. Butler.]


I beg to move, in page 178, line 27, after "provided," to insert, "or preserved."


May we have an explanation of the Amendment?


These Amendments are equivalent to those which were moved in the Indian section, Clauses 12 and 52, and they are in order to ensure safeguards for retired members of the Civil Service.


The hon. and gallant Member for Bournemouth (Sir H. Croft) will no doubt remember that I said that, in going through these Amendments rapidly, I would stop and pause if they were not identical with what we have already done.

Amendment agreed to.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

8.51 p.m.


I should like to ask whether it really is the intention of His Majesty's Government, after the eloquent speeches which we have heard from Lancashire this evening, to keep in paragraph (f) of Sub-section (1). May I urge once more that to insert these words in a great Legislative Act: the prevention of action which would subject goods of United Kingdom or Indian origin imported into Burma to discriminatory or penal treatment. is something which we have never seen inserted in any Act of Parliament before with regard to a British Possession. Have the Government taken cognisance of the point mentioned by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Rusholme (Mr. Radford) with regard to the fact that the status quo which the Secretary of State reassured the. Committee was going to continue during the five years, there is discriminatory action against British goods being imported into India? May I ask whether, as an answer has not been given to the hon. Gentleman's specific point, His Majesty's Government are going to consider that point, or are we going to throw away for five years, or perhaps for all time, an entry into this great market which was built up under British genius and skill, just because we do not appreciate the damaging nature of this Sub-section?

8. 53


It was not through any wish not to do so that I did not reply to the hon. Member for Rusholme (Mr. Radford) when he raised this question. I envisaged that there would be an opportunity when we reached this part of the Bill. The hon. and gallant Member will remember that in the case of India the operation of this special responsibility and the occasions on which it might be used are described in the Instrument of Instructions to the Governor-General, and the terms of the Instrument of Instructions exactly bear out the advice given to us on this subject by the Joint Select Committee. The hon. and learned Member will find the exact terms set out in paragraph XIV of the Instrument of Instructions. It is our intention to preserve the Sub-section for Burma as we consider it has been put there for special reasons which were referred to in certain terms by the hon. Member for Rusholme.

I can assure the hon. and gallant Member that an equivalent meaning will be included in the Instruments of Instructions regarding the operation of this particular responsibility as included in paragraph (f) of Sub-section (1).


Is there any hope that the specific point with regard to the duties which are at the present moment discriminatory against British goods in Rangoon will be included in the Instruments of Instructions?


On that broad question, I think that I had better give the general answer that for the time being I have nothing to add to what I have said about the nature of the agreement up to the time that the period elapses. It will be for the two autonomous governments to come to an agreement about our trade, and at any time after the new constitution starts, if there is any action of a discriminatory or penal nature, it is covered by paragraph XIV, for instance, of the Instrument of Instructions of the Governor-General. The Governor will have a similar right to intervene.

Clause 305 ordered to stand part of the Bill.