HC Deb 29 June 1938 vol 337 cc2058-60

Amendments made:

In page 25, line 41, leave out "a form," and insert "forms."

In page 26, line 25, leave out "form of contract has," and insert "forms of contract have."

In line 28, leave out "form," and insert "forms."—[Mr. W. S. Morrison.

10.36 p.m.

Mr. Ramsbotham

I beg to move, in page 26, line 40, to leave out "by or on behalf of the purchaser."

The Bacon Marketing Board and the Pigs Marketing Board both have power under Clauses 41 and 43 respectively to regulate the transport of pigs by or on behalf of their respective registered purchasers. The view is taken, rightly, that in matters which may affect outside interests, those of transport and insurance, it is desirable that the actions of these boards should be subject to the directions of the Development Board, and one of the objects of Sub-section (5) of this Clause is to secure that except with the consent of the Development Board no provision shall be included in any form of contract which would require pigs sold thereunder to be transported or insured by or on behalf of the purchaser in a particular manner or on particular terms. As the Bill stands there might be some difficulty over the interpretation of that Sub-section. The woi4ds which I am moving to omit might be held, by implication, to permit these marketing boards to act independently in regulating the transport and insurance of pigs on behalf of pig producers. That is not the intention of the Sub-section.

10.38 p.m.

Mr. Alexander

I very much object to this Amendment. The Minister of Pensions has put the matter very nicely, but there is no doubt as to what is the intention. In the first place it is quite unreasonable that such an important question as the compulsion which may be brought upon individual units in the scheme to accept either monopoly trans- port or monopoly insurance arrangements should be independent of the Development Board, and I see something quite sinister about the methods of the Ministry in dealing with this matter having regard to the history of these transport and insurance questions in the past. We have always been against the Ministry's policy and this change will make it even more difficult for the matter to be dealt with afterwards. I cannot understand why this matter was not brought up in Committee. I should like to read the Sub-section: Except with the consent of the Development Board no provision shall be included in any form of contract which would require pigs sold thereunder to be transported or insured by or on behalf of the purchaser in a particular manner or on particular terms, but save as aforesaid and save as otherwise expressly provided in this section. There is no earthly reason why you should leave out the words which refer to the purchaser and which were a saving for the purchaser, in the Clause as it originally stood, and unless there is some better explanation of this Amendment than we have had from the Minister of Pensions I shall certainly ask my hon. Friends to divide against it.

10.41 p.m.

Mr. Ramsbotham

I am very much surprised at the right hon. Gentleman's speech.

Mr. Alexander

I knew you would be.

Mr. Ramsbotham

I thought he would have agreed that these words should be left out. On various occasions during our discussions he has expressed his confidence in the Development Board and his wish to give the Development Board the maximum amount of power. If these words were not left out it might be thought by implication that the Pigs Marketing Board could act independently of the Development Board in arranging for transport, and I am more than surprised to find that the right hon. Gentleman desires in the case of transport contracts that the Pigs Marketing Board should be independent of the Development Board and be able to make what terms it likes without the consent of and irrespective of any arrangement made by the Development Board. That would be the possible result of leaving in the words. In order to make certain that the Pigs Marketing Board should not act inde- pendently of the Development Board in regard to transport contracts, these words should be taken out. I can only believe that the fault is mine in my explanation.

10.43 p.m.

Mr. Alexander

I said that unless I got a better explanation I should have to divide the House. If the Minister will refer to the OFFICIAL REPORT he will find —unless, of course, he revises his speech to-night—that he said exactly the opposite when he moved the Amendment to what he has just said. He said that the object of leaving out the words was to prevent these things being under the control of the Development Board.

Mr. Ramsbotham

indicated dissent.

Mr. Alexander

Oh, yes, I specifically put that point to the House, but if the Minister says that the object of the Amendment is to see that this operates under the control of the Development Board, I shall not divide the House.

Mr. Ramsbotham

The important thing is that I should get it right now, and if the right hon. Gentleman understands that that is so, I hope that he will not divide the House on the Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 27, line 1, leave out "in determining the form," and insert "as respects the determination of the forms."—[Mr. W. S. Morrison.]