FINANCE BILL. (Hansard, 30 June 1937)

§ The Chairman
The Chancellor of the Exchequer.

§ Sir J. Simon
I understood that the right hon. Member for Edinburgh, East (Mr. Pethick-Lawrence) wanted to raise a question as to how most conveniently we can deal with the new Clauses.

§ The Chairman
I think we can deal with that point as a question of order.

§ Mr. Pethick-Lawrence
On a point of Order. I have been looking at the new Clauses which the Chancellor of the Exchequer is proposing should be added to the Bill and considering the best method by which we can deal with them. I think I am correct in saying that if we proceeded strictly in the usual manner we should take the Second Reading of the first Clause which the Chancellor is proposing, and, if we passed the Second 2039 Reading, proceed to discuss the Amendments to that Clause, and not until we had disposed of them should we have the Second Reading of the second Clause which stands in the name of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and so we should go on until we had disposed of all the Clauses which are down in his name. I think it must be clear to the Committee, as I have no doubt it will be to you, Sir Dennis, that these Clauses hang together, that they are all part of one proposal which the Chancellor explained to us on the Money Resolution, and I therefore suggest that, with your approval, the Committee should proceed to take the Second Reading of these Clauses as a whole—that we should discuss them all together from a Second Reading aspect and, having clone that, proceed to the Amendments on the first Clause. When we come to the second Clause I suggest that we should then take the Second Reading of it pro forma, without further debate, and proceed to deal with the Amendments to it; and so on in the case of all the Clauses relating to this new tax If that were clone, it would save the time of the Committee.

§ Sir J. Simon
The right hon. Gentleman was good enough to mention this proposal to me, and I have therefore had an opportunity of considering it, and subject to one clear understanding I think the suggestion is a good one. It is true that the Clauses must be regarded as all forming part of one scheme, and I think it may be added that as they are new Clauses which have seen the light since the Second Reading of the Bill, there would not be the same objection to having a Second Reading of the whole group together. I think that plan would assure that we have the best sort of discussion and get through our business more quickly, but it is clearly subject to this condition, that having had this Second Reading discussion on the scheme as a whole, we shall not have more Second. Reading discussions on individual Clauses—

§ Mr. Pethick-Lawrence
I said that.

§ Sir J. Simon
—and that we shall deal strictly then with each Amendment as it comes up. As far as I can see, the Amendments deal with concrete points which, I think, would be better discussed 2040 on each Amendment rather than on the Clauses.

§ The Chairman
The first Clause which stands in the name of the Chancellor of the Exchequer imposes the charge of the National Defence Contribution and all the other new Clauses and new Schedules standing in his name have to do with what I call the machinery of the tax which is charged by that first Clause. That being the case I think it would be impossible to discuss the first new Clause without considerable references to the other new Clauses, and provided that the Committee generally assent to it, I think it would be convenient to allow the discussion on this first new Clause to be as wide as possible, that is to say to embrace anything which would be relevant either to the new Clauses or the Schedules in the Chancellor's name. I am sure the Committee will agree that after that, when we come to the further new Clauses and Schedules, we should at once read each new Clause or new Schedule a Second time, and then proceed to the Amendments. If the Committee generally approve of that course, I am sure that it will be for the general convenience of the Committee.

Hon. Members
Agreed.

Major Hills
I take it the discussion would include the Schedules as well as the new Clauses?

§ The Chairman
Yes, I expressly mentioned the Schedules, because the new Schedules are as important a part of the machinery of the tax as are the new Clauses.