§ 48. Mr. SHINWELLasked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the difficulty in recording an expression of opinion on certain aspects of the household means test in the forthcoming Unemployment Assistance Regulations, he will withdraw the Government Whips and permit a free Vote of the House.
§ The PRIME MINISTERNo, Sir.
§ Mr. SHINWELLDoes not the right hon. Gentleman recognise that many of his supporters will be in a position of great difficulty?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI recognise, if the hon. Gentleman were in my place and I in his, the answer that I should have got.
§ Mr. SHINWELLWill the right hon. Gentleman advise the resignation of his Government and try it out?
§ Captain HAROLD BALFOURIf this means test really had to take into account all the earnings of the family, including widows and children, how does it differ from Circular 1069 of the Labour party?
§ Mr. ATTLEE (by Private Notice)asked the Prime Minister whether he can make any statement with regard to the issue of the draft Unemployment Assistance Regulations?
§ The PRIME MINISTERIn order to meet the convenience of the House, my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour has done his utmost to arrange for the issue of the draft Unemployment Assistance Regulations some days earlier than 14th July, the date previously announced. He now finds that it will be possible to issue them to-morrow, 9th July. Copies of the draft Regulations and other relevant documents will be obtainable in the Vote Office to-morrow evening.
§ Mr. ATTLEEIs it proposed that these draft Regulations shall be debated before the House rises for the Summer Adjournment?
§ The PRIME MINISTERYes, Sir.
§ Mr. ATTLEEMay I ask the Prime Minister to consider this point. These Regulations concern a vast number of people and time is extremely short to ascertain what their effect Will be. Further, they concern local authorities who will be presently rising for their summer vacation, and will have but a short time to consider them. Is it not possible to have a Debate but not to come to a final decision until the autumn?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI understood that the right hon. Gentleman desired to raise that point. While I have always been anxious since I have been Leader of the House to do what I can to meet the Opposition in any reasonable demand, I cannot see my way, after mature 1193 consideration, to accede to that request. By dint of a good deal of rather heavy work we have arranged to produce these Regulations some days earlier than was originally intended, and in our view ample time will be allowed—far longer than was allowed last year; the time was short then. In our view it is the duty of the House, as soon as they have had an opportunity of studying these Regulations, to see that they are passed, if the House think fit to pass them. I can say nothing at the moment as to the date, because I am anxious to give the House as long as possible for their consideration. We propose to give three days' full discussion to this matter, and we propose to complete it before the House rises for the Recess.
§ Mr. ATTLEEMay I put another point to the Prime Minister? As he knows, the difficulty about these Regulations is that it is not possible for the House to amend them. The difficulty over the last Regulations was that they were unamendable, and if a preliminary discussion was held before the House rises for the adjournment it would be possible to review the whole matter, and if there was a necessity for amendment they could be reintroduced in the autumn; otherwise we shall be in the same difficulty as last year, when Regulations which had been passed had to be withdrawn.
§ The PRIME MINISTERWhat the right hon. Gentleman has said is the fact, and it is because of that fact that the Government have given so much time to a close examination of the details of these Regulations. I do not believe that the difficulties which the right hon. Gentleman anticipates will arise in practice. The fact that we have to take them as a whole or leave them is owing to the Statute.
§ Mr. ATTLEEHas not the Prime Minister really supported the point 1 made? If it took so long for the Government to consider these Regulations, is it fair for this House and the country to have to come to a final decision at such very short notice?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI do not quite see the force of that. I think the work we have done will render the work of the House very much easier.
§ Mr. BUCHANANMay I ask the Prime Minister to consider three points? First of all, is he aware that the local authorities are vitally concerned, that in Scotland at the present time all the local authorities are on holiday, that the town council of the second city in Britain—Glasgow—has now risen for the holidays, and that it is impossible to consult with the local representatives? Secondly, is he aware that on the issue of Income Tax in regard to children, the Chancellor of the Exchequer stated that he thought that it was always desirable before finally making up his mind on legislation to hear what the Members of the House have to say, and will the Prime Minister employ the same practice on these Regulations as he does in the case of Income Tax for the rich? Thirdly, seeing that the Government and the board which has had to go into the matter have now taken 12 months to consider it, surely the Prime Minister might give the House of Commons at least a much more reasonable opportunity of examining the Regulations?
§ The PRIME MINISTERWith regard to the last point, the hon. Member and the House must bear in mind that at the time of the last General Election it was made perfectly clear that these amended Regulations would be brought forward, and certain undertakings were given at the time by Members who contested seats at the General Election. It has been our endeavour—unfortunately a very protracted one—to get these Regulations as quickly as we could. We have been pressed by the Opposition to produce the Regulations, and not only to produce them, but to pass them into law. With regard to the hon. Member's point about local authorities, he is aware that there is no statutory connection between the public assistance allowances paid by the local authorities and those paid under the Regulations. The local authorities so far as they may be available have all the information that the hon. Member and other Scottish Members will require and they can get the information they may desire, and in our view there will be ample time for the examination of the Regulations and for them to get such information as they desire. I do not believe for one moment that with the period of time now remaining any Member of the House who desires to make 1195 himself sufficiently familiar with the subject to take part in the three days' Debate will be in any way hampered in doing so.
§ Mr. BUCHANANWould the House or the Government lose anything by at least hearing what the Members of the House of Commons have to say before finally making up their minds? Having heard what the board has to say and what every other kind of people has to say, is it too much to ask the right hon. Gentleman, before bringing the Regulations forward in final form, that he should ask the public representatives of the people concerned what they have to say before making up his mind?
§ The PRIME MINISTERI trust that will be so. There will be a very long period, and in that time the House will have no difficulty in listening to what may be said by those who are qualified to speak on this very difficult subject, and come to a decision.
§ Mr. ARTHUR GREENWOODMay I put two points to the Prime Minister? The first concerns a matter to which he has already referred when he said there is no connection whatever between the public assistance committees of the local authorities and the new Regulations. I would point out that there is a very vital connection, that is to say, the question of the second appointed day, which is bound to come up. May I put it to the right hon. Gentleman that, in fairness to the local authorities, who will not be aware of the Government's proposals until Friday morning, an interval of time should elapse before the Government make up their mind in order that they may hear what the local authorities have to say? My second point is that the trade union movement of the country will not be aware of the proposals which are made, and their members are very vitally concerned by them. Surely there ought to be some interval of time in which they can make their representations to the Government? Would it not be meeting the convenience of the House on all sides, and would it not perhaps be wiser for the Government to allow representations to be made to them after a free discussion rather than to come to a decision which they might have to reverse when the House re-assembles in the autumn?
§ The PRIME MINISTERThe right hon. Gentleman has put his points very clearly and very reasonably, but I cannot see my way to meet him, because in my view it is important that the House should come to its decision and that, particularly after the long time we have been waiting, there should be no further delay. With regard to the appointed day, I understand it will be announced to-morrow. We have been at pains to put the appointed day a considerable distance ahead, and this will give ample time for all the authorities to study the proposals and to make their necessary arrangements.
§ Mr. GREENWOODI understand the new Regulations are to operate from 1st November. We are not asking for any change of date. There can be no delay if the House meets in October. There is no reason why the decision should be taken now. If it were taken in October, the right hon. Gentleman would in the meantime have had the advantage of being able to collect public opinion on this matter before the House comes to a final decision.
§ The PRIME MINISTERI think the right hon. Gentleman said 1st November; I believe it is 16th November.
§ Mr. HARDIEMay I ask a question on behalf of the City of Glasgow, which has suffered more than any other city in regard to the strain put upon it? The Prime Minister has said that there will be time for the local authorities to consider these Regulations, but if a decision is taken now what will be the good of that consideration, since it will not be possible for any change to be made. It is no good telling us a certain thing has been decided unless we have power to say it is wrong and that it has to be put right. What right has any government to say that a local authority, treated as Glasgow would be, with a big surplus—[Interruption].