HC Deb 30 March 1938 vol 333 cc2123-37

9.54 p.m.

Captain Crookshank

I beg to move, in page 22, line 41, after "that," to insert: (a) this Sub-section shall have effect without prejudice to the right of the Commission, in a case in which it appears to them requisite for the proper discharge of their duty under Section two of this Act so to do, to grant relief to a lessee from payment of particular instalments of rent reserved by a lease; and (b) This Clause deals with the possibility of the reduction by the Commission of rents. The question was raised during the Committee stage on Sub-section (3), as to whether it would be possible for the Commission to reduce rents if an undertaking came across some physical or economic difficulties during the currency of its lease. The House will recollect that under the Clause the rents may be reduced in certain circumstances, in Subsection (2), when a surplus becomes available at the disposal of the Commission. Sub-section (3) of the Clause lays it down that the Commission shall not reduce any rents during the currency of the lease except in the general way already outlined in Sub-section (2), but, on the contrary, shall reserve the best rent which in their opinion can reasonably be obtained, having regard to certain things. There is the proviso that they may reduce the rent reserved by a lease, or may grant a lease reserving a rent less than the best rent, if they are satisfied that by doing that there is a financial advantage substantially equivalent in value to the amount of the reduction.

That does not anticipate physical difficulties, which, as hon. Members who are versed in these affairs know, may occur at any moment, and does not take into account any economic difficulties which may come the way of a particular undertaking. When we were discussing this matter in Committee, I said that I thought that, as far as physical difficulties were concerned, one might be able to find words covering physical difficulties, but that economic difficulties were not quite as easy in the way of drafting or definition. My right hon. Friend proposes this proviso to the House in order to get over that particular difficulty. The proviso is that this Sub-section shall have effect without prejudice to the right of the Commission.… to grant relief to a lessee from payment of particular instalments of rent reserved by a lease in cases where it seems to be necessary for the proper discharge of their duties under Section 2 of the Act. I must remind the House that that refers to the duty of the Commission to control and manage premises which they acquire by granting leases, in such manner consistently with the provisions of the Act as they think best for promoting the interests, efficiency and better organisation of the coal-mining industry. That is a sort of statutory charter of how they are generally to deal with these problems. If the Commission are satisfied, in the interests of efficiency and better organisation of the industry, that it is desirable in particular cases, owing to physical or economic difficulties, that a particular lessee should have some reduction made, not permanent but in the nature of relief from instalments of the rent reserved by the lease, then, under the new proviso which we are inviting the House to insert, the Commission will be able to do it. I believe that it will meet the difficulty, and will enable the Commission to function—as, I am sure, all of us, wherever we sit in this House, would wish it to function—to the best possible advantage. A good landlord to-day does offer remissions of rent in case of difficulty, and a statutory Commission ought to be as good as the best landlord. These words are devised to carry out the undertaking which I gave on the Committee stage and are really fitted for the purpose for which they are intended.

10.0 p.m.

Mr. R. J. Taylor

I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, in line 3, after "do," to insert: and in consideration of a person nominated by the Commission being appointed the manager of the coal mine the subject of the lease. The Amendment of the Minister proposes that there should be relief altogether from rent during some period of the working of the pits, and it is proposed in the Amendment which I have moved, that, if there is to be relief of that nature, the interests of the nation, which are safeguarded and looked after by the Commission, should be further safeguarded by the Commission having the right to appoint a manager during that period. If a coal mine or any other industry gets into the hands of the banks, it is not an unusual thing for those who are holding the baby to provide a manager to look after it, to see whether it is possible to bring the particular industry or mine out of its difficult period, and to try and make it pay. I have had experience of a mine being in the hands of a receiver, and while a manager was not actually appointed in that case, there were clerks placed in the colliery office to see to the buying and selling which took place at the pits. This release of rent which is a subsidy to the particular company, would place them in an advantageous position compared with other collieries, and if that is to be done a manager should be appointed. I have two collieries in mind which would have been working probably if something of this nature had been done, and probably a thousand men who had been thrown idle would have been working.

If the subsidy is to be given, the Commission should have someone to manage the pit in their interests, so as to ensure the mine being worked in the best interests. It is not always the fault of the manager that mines do not pay. There are managing directors and there are agents, and sometimes very stupid directors, who determine what the manager has to do. The manager is the servant of the directors, and under the thumb of the colliery agent. Only last year I was approached by two colliery managers who asked me, if I had an opportunity when the Coal Mines Bill came before the House of Commons, to make out a case for colliery managers to be independent and paid by the State. You can have a colliery not paying, and it may not be the manager's fault. You allow the manager to continue and the pit may continue not to pay, and the case may arise when this levy or subsidy may be required, but the poor manager dare not report to the Commission the reason why the pit is not paying. If the manager were appointed by the Commission, although he would be under the directors and would report to them on the working of the pit, he would be independent to a certain extent, because they would not be able to sack him. It would be the Commission that would have the right to dismiss him.

10.6 p.m.

Mr. S. O. Davies

I beg to second the Amendment to the proposed Amendment.

I do not think that the Secretary for Mines has helped very much with the new Amendment that he has suggested should be inserted. Presumably, this assistance will be given when a colliery may be experiencing physical or economic difficulties. Early in the Debate, references were made, and I think accepted by the House, to the fact that a colliery might be in financial difficulties, not paying its way, for purely a temporary period. For instance, many hon. Members know of collieries with which they have been associated where a considerable amount of expenditure has been incurred with a view ultimately to economising in the general working of the colliery. The pit may be 20, 30 or 40 years old and may have a long, winding roadway running underground into many miles, and the company may decide to short circuit this. That means invariably adding considerably but temporarily to the expenditure incurred in the working of that colliery; but it is an expenditure that almost invariably it pays the colliery to indulge in. I do not think that any concession should be made in a case of that kind.

I presume that no one knows what will be the composition of the Commission, whether they will be gentlemen expert in coal mining or whether they will know very little about it. We know some of the positions that will arise. Those of us who have had experience in working at collieries, or have been associated with collieries in some other way, know that collieries may apparently be losing money, but we know very well that that is fictitious accounting, and that a considerable proportion of the colliery's output goes to neighbouring iron and steel works owned by the same company. It may be a colliery which has on a pit bank nearby a huge by-product works, to which a great deal of the output of the colliery goes, and that by-product works is owned by the colliery company. We have had to draw the attention of more than one Commission to the fact that coal has been transferred by the owners of collieries to their own iron and steel works or other kind of works, at nominal or fictitious prices. We know the ease with which the books of a colliery company can show a loss, when in fact the whole of the loss has been manufactured, either deliberately or by some other means.

I support the Amendment to the proposed Amendment because the whole of our experience teaches us that such an Amendment is necessary, otherwise the old practice against which we have protested for at least a generation will be carried on, and the Commission may be misled. I hope that the Commission will be empowered to put in an expert colliery manager who will understand the workings of the colliery and be able to say in a short time whether the colliery is losing money, or experiencing any economic or financial difficulty as a result of physical or other difficulties over which the company have no control, or whether the difficulties have been deliberately manufactured, as we have seen them so frequently manufactured in our past association with coal-mining.

10.13 p.m.

Captain Crookshank

The hon. Member who moved the Amendment said that it ought to be adopted in respect of any of the undertakings to which I referred in my Amendment, before they get any remission in rent. He used the phrase: "Before they draw the subsidy." I must, in the interests of precision and accuracy, say that that is not the proper interpretation, in the ordinary sense, of the words: "a reduction in rent." The hon. Member may think it is, but other people do not. What my Amendment proposes is that the Commission shall have the power to grant remissions of rent, if it thinks fit. The Mover of the present Amendment said that if there were either physical or economic difficulties, they would not necessarily be the fault of the manager. Certainly, there can be physical difficulties without there being any fault on the manager's part, and it need not necessarily be the fault of the manager if the undertaking gets into other difficulties. The hon. Member said that in order to ensure fair working the colliery manager should be as independent as possible. I think he overlooked the fact that this Amendment, if it means anything, means that when the Commission wishes to make a reduction in a particular instalment of rent, they can only do so when they have nominated someone as manager. That ipso facto means that the existing manager has been got rid of.

If that is not so, and if they are going to nominate the existing manager, it is a more foolish proposal than I thought. The assumption is that they are dissatisfied with the existing manager, or fear that somehow or other they had been misled as to the financial state of the company, and that they will put in some one of their own so that in future there will be no misleading of anyone; the Commission will have its own man at the pit as the manager who will see exactly what is going on. While I cannot accept these various premises, the conclusion to which I have come is that whether the plan is a good one or not it is quite contrary to what we have already passed in the Bill in Clause 2, Sub-section (1), which says that the Commission shall not themselves engage in the business of coal-mining. If they are going to nominate the manager of a colliery to see that everything is above-board, that no bogus losses are shown, that is to engage in the business of coal-mining if words mean anything.

Mr. S. O. Davies

Will the hon. and gallant Member explain how the Commission can absolutely satisfy itself that such losses are genuine?

Captain Crookshank

I cannot elaborate what steps the Commission which is not yet in existence will take to satisfy itself on a matter of that kind, but I am certain it would take the same steps as any good landlord does to-day, and that whatever means are available to a good land- lord will be used by the Commission, and perhaps other means as well. I want to make this point clear. Either the new nominated manager is going to be somehow or other the servant of the Commission—that is one possibility and if that is so we are going contrary to what we have passed in Clause 2—or he is to remain the servant of the company which employs him—that is the other alternative. He is to be nominated by the Commission but is to remain the servant of the undertaking which employs him. It is an impossible position for anyone to be nominated by an outside body and be the servant of another undertaking, which might not like the man and might say that he has not the proper qualification. Yet it is proposed to put him in by Statute. [Interruption.] It is said that it is competent for the Commission to reduce the rent if the undertaking is up against some difficulty either physical or economic, but I thought I made it quite plain that it is no good saying, "Make them pay the rent" because they do not like the manager which the Commission has appointed against their wishes. I cannot recommend the House to accept this proposed Amendment to the Amendment.

10.20 p.m.

Sir S. Cripps

The hon. and gallant Member has very little knowledge, I imagine, of the management of property. Has the hon. and gallant Gentleman never heard of a receiver being put into mortgaged property?

Captain Crookshank

That is another story.

Sir S. Cripps

It is not another story. It is a story where payments which are due for the property from the mortgagor to the mortgagee are not paid, and in those circumstances the mortgagee has the right to appoint a receiver, who is the servant of the mortgagor, although appointed by the mortgagee. That is an every-day practice all over the country as regards property of all sorts and kinds. It is not at all extraordinary or odd that one person should appoint somebody by Statute who becomes, by Statute, the servant of another person. That is a common practice carried out every day in every town of this country as regards mortgages under the Law of Property Act. Really, it only discloses the hon. and gallant Gentleman's profound ignorance when he makes the sort of speech he has just made. Let me pass now to the realities of this Amendment. In the first place, the hon. and gallant Gentleman said that relief of rent is not a subsidy. Has he ever heard of the expression "subsidised rents"? It is a common expression. Where a rent is less than an economic rent, the difference between the actual rent and the economic rent is the subsidy, and it is therefore always referred to as a subsidised rent. I venture to think that if the hon. and gallant Gentleman got someone to pay the rent of his house for him, he would not be averse to saying that he was being subsidised to the extent of his rent by the other person. I am not suggesting it should happen. I merely want to make the hon. and gallant Gentleman's mouth water.

Captain Crookshank

Is the hon. and learned Gentleman making an offer?

Sir S. Cripps

I am not making an offer. If ever I subsidise somebody, it will be somebody more useful and better that he is. Secondly, the hon. and gallant Gentleman said that the Amendment is contrary to Clause 2. It is nothing of the sort. This is not an Amendment by which the Coal Commission would engage in the management. It is a position where they would do just as the mortgagee does, that is to say, nominate a man who is to become the servant of the company. If the company, for any reason whatever, is in receipt of a subsidy from the Coal Commission, why should not the Coal Commission during the period the subsidy is paid, have someone to guard their interests, to see whether, in fact, the subsidy is really necessary, and whether it does not arise out of inefficiency or out of one hundred and one other causes out of which it may arise, instead of out of the alleged cause of meeting some physical difficulty or economic circumstances?

I do not know whether the hon. and gallant Gentleman has ever been in the position of a landlord and had tenants come to him to explain that they cannot pay the rent, and whether he has always found that everything they have said has been strictly accurate and in accordance with the facts, and that the cause of their misfortunes has always been the cause to which they attributed them, the weather or a bad season or something of that sort. I conceive that any mining company would naturally say, "Oh, it is physical difficulties; we have got into rock and we want you to pay the rent while we get through the rock." Why should not the Coal Commission have this opportunity, if they are going to give the subsidy, to put someone in charge of the mine or to see that someone is in charge of the mine who is competent, they think, to carry on the business? It seems to me to be the most ordinary safeguard for cases of this kind, and exactly in accordance with the practice which has been followed in many other cases of property management for a great number of years.

10.25 p.m.

Mr. J. Griffiths

The Secretary for Mines, in attempting to reply on this Amendment, said some things which I think ought to be cleared up, because by the words he has spoken he has tied the hands of the Commission very substantially. Let me give to the House one or two cases. In general, we welcome this right of remission. We pleaded during the Committee stage that where the Commission thought they could save the life of a colliery by doing so, they should have the opportunity to remit. But the hon. and gallant Gentleman now says, "We will grant them that right but they must not interfere in the management of the mine or appoint a manager. If they do so they will be acting contrary to Clause 2, which says that they shall not engage in the business of coal-mining." I can conceive of cases in which that will prevent the Commission from doing really useful work. We all know of cases in which owners have pleaded physical difficulties or economic difficulties and in which costs have run up and collieries have become unremunerative. Very often these are small collieries with very limited resources as regards technical advice. They have probably to rely upon managers of limited experience.

Suppose a bank lends money to such a company. It does so on the condition that it will have the right to nominate a manager or to send in, as a consultant, a mining engineer of wide experience, who will be responsible to the bank. That consultant or manager goes in and revolutionises the working of the pit and makes it a success. That would not have happened had it not been for the fact that the bank, with its larger resources, was able to provide the requisite technical advice and experience. The hon. Gentleman, however, says that the Commission must not do that. The Government seem to be frightened of the Commission having anything to do with the management of the mines and they are therefore tying up the Commission considerably in this respect. We only ask that the Commission, when they do grant a remission of this kind, should have the same right as a bank would have in similar circumstances. Why should a public body set up by Parliament to manage this industry in the interest of the nation have less rights than a private bank would have? The best job that the Commission can do is to assist colliery companies which get into difficulties, by providing for them technical advice which would be beyond their own resources.

10.29 p.m.

Mr. Gallacher

There are dangers in the Amendment which has been moved by the Minister unless the words proposed from this side are inserted in it. We have all had experience of the tricks to which mineowners resort in order to present their books in such a way as to give the impression of a loss when they are actually making money. As a result of this they show a debt which has to be wiped off before the miners are entitled to increases. We know the tricks which are resorted to in connection with ascertainments. I want to ask the Minister whether it is not the case that the Government have been very much disturbed and have been put to very much trouble in order to find ways and means of dealing with tax dodgers. We have heard the Prime Minister, when Chancellor of the Exchequer, giving us the most woeful lamentations from that Box about the "Artful Dodgers" on the other side, and we have considerable correspondence in the Press at the present time on how to dodge taxes and whether it is desirable or otherwise. But here we are getting from the Minister a deliberate encouragement for a new piece of dodging, and with the skill that the mineowners have shown in the past, even the so-called good mineowners, for operating their accounts in such a way as always to get the main advantage, and with the fact that there are discussions in the "Times" and other newspapers on how to discover new methods of dodging taxes, what could be better for the mineowners than that they should pay their taxes out of the rents?

I appeal to the Minister, as a serious man, to understand the danger that exists in this particular Amendment of his. It can easily be avoided. It can be avoided if the Commission has the necessary power, wherever there is a company that is incapable of paying its rent, to put someone there who can, on behalf of the Commission, examine into the whole of the pit and decide for the Commission over a period of time whether or not the deficit is well founded. If it is, then the proposition put forward by the hon. Member for Llanelly (Mr. J. Griffiths) can be put into operation, and the Commission can then add to the management—the right of appointing a manager will carry with it the right of seeing to it that the pit is properly managed—a mining engineer who thoroughly understands everything about the pit and who can bring it into proper working again. I therefore suggest that there could not be a more reasonable or a more desirable Amendment than the Amendment to the proposed Amendment, and I appeal to the Government and the House to accept it.

10.34 p.m.

Mr. David Adams

I support the Amendment to the proposed Amendment, and probably, in view of the overwhelming arguments that have been advanced in its favour, the Minister is now prepared to accept it. This is an extremely ordinary practice. It is nothing unusual, where a financial grant is made to any concern, for someone to be appointed to supervise the interests of those who have made the advance, or the subsidy, or the grant. I have had an illustration of that as a member of the Newcastle City Council. That council is a large owner of coal, which is sublet to various colliery companies in and about Newcastle. Almost the whole of the city is undermined with colliery workings, and what is known as Town Moor, an area of 1,100 acres, is being worked by two or three colliery companies.

Owing to the period of depression through which these firms have passed, an application was made recently for a reduction of rental to meet the heavy adverse balances which had been incurred in the finances of the coal companies. The Estates and Property Committee of the corporation were instructed to look into the accounts to satisfy themselves, with their expert knowledge, whether any remission of rental should be granted. In due course a detailed financial statement of the position was submitted to the council, who consented to a reduction of rental. That was a perfectly normal business procedure. The result is that the city council during the period of the reduced rental can, if they wish, have a supervisory control over the organisation of the colliery company. All that we are

asking in this Amendment is that in similar circumstances—for the Commission will be the owner of the Newcastle coal in due course—the same procedure should be the law of the land. It is a normal business procedure and anything short of it will fail to protect the public interest in this matter.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the proposed Amendment."

The House divided: Ayes, 104; Noes, 212.

Division No. 157.] AYES. [10.39 p.m.
Adams, D. (Consatt) Green, W. H. (Deptford) Parker, J.
Adamson, W. M. Grenfell, D. R. Parkinson, J. A.
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.) Griffiths, J. (Llanelly) Pearson, A.
Ammon, C. G. Hall, G. H. (Aberdare) Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Anderson, F. (Whitehaven) Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel) Price, M. P.
Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R. Hayday, A. Quibell, D. J. K.
Banfield, J. W. Henderson, A. (Kingswinford) Richards, R, (Wrexham)
Barnes, A. J. Henderson, T. (Tradeston) Ridley, G.
Barr, J. Hills, A. (Pontefract) Riley, B.
Bellenger, F. J. Hopkin, D. Ritson, J.
Benn, Rt. Hon. W. W. Jagger, J. Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)
Broad, F. A. Jenkins, A. (Pontypool) Sexton, T. M.
Bromfield, W. Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath) Shinwell, E.
Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (S. Ayrshire) John, W. Silverman, S. S.
Cape, T. Johnston, Rt. Hon. T. Simpson, F. B.
Charleton, H. C. Jones, A. C. (Shipley) Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)
Chater, D. Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly) Smith, E. (Stoke)
Cluse, W. S. Kelly, W. T. Smith, T. (Normanton)
Cocks, F. S. Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T. Stewart, W. J. (H'ght'n-le-Sp'ng)
Cove, W. G. Leach, W. Strauss, G. R. (Lambeth, N.)
Cripps, Mon. Sir Stafford Lee, F. Taylor, R. J. (Morpeth)
Daggar, G. Leonard, W. Thurtle, E.
Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill) Leslie, J. R. Tinker, J. J.
Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton) Logan, D. G. Tomlinson, G.
Davies, S. O. (Merthyr) Lunn, W. Viant, S. P.
Day, H. Macdonald, G. (Ince) Walkden, A. G.
Dobbie, W. McEntee, V. La T. Watkins, F. C.
Dunn, E. (Rother Valley) McGhee, H. G. Watson, W. McL.
Ede, J. C. MacLaren, A. Williams, T. (Don Valley)
Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty) Montague, F. Wilson, C. H. (Attercliffe)
Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr, R. T. H. Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.) Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)
Frankel, D. Muff, G. Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)
Gallacher, W. Naylor, T. E.
Gardner, B. W. Noel-Baker, P. J. TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesey) Oliver, G. H. Mr. Groves and Mr. Mathers.
Gibson, R. (Greerock) Paling, W.
NOES.
Adams, S. V. T. (Leeds, W.) Bull, B. B. Cross, R. H.
Agnew, Lieut.-Comdr. P. G. Bullock, Capt. M. Crossley, A. C.
Albery, Sir Irving Burghley, Lord Crowder, J. F. E.
Anstruther-Gray, W. J. Butcher, H. W. Cruddas, Col. B.
Aske, Sir R. W. Campbell, Sir E. T. Culverwell, C. T.
Astor, Hon. W. W. (Fulham, E.) Carver, Major W. H. Davies, Major Sir G. F. (Yeovil)
Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet) Castlereagh, Viscount Dawson, Sir P.
Balniel, Lord Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.) Denman, Hon. R. D.
Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H. Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. N. (Edgb't'n) Denville, Alfred
Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm'h) Chapman, A. (Rutherglen) Dodd, J. S
Beechman, N. A. Christie, J. A. Duckworth, Arthur (Shrewsbury)
Bernays, R. H Clarke, Colonel R. S. (E. Grinstead) Dugdale, Captain T. L.
Birchall, Sir J. D. Clarry, Sir Reginald Duggan, H. J.
Bird, Sir R. B. Cobb, Captain E. C. (Preston) Duncan, J. A. L.
Boulton, W. W. Colville, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. D. J. Eastwood, J. F.
Bower, Comdr. R. T. Conant, Captain R. J. E. Eckersley, P. T.
Bracken, B. Cook, Sir T. R. A. M. (Norfolk, N.) Ellis, Sir G.
Braithwaite, Major A. N. Cooke, J. O. (Hammersmith, S.) Elliston, Capt. G. S.
Brass, Sir W. Cox, H. B. Trevor Emery, J. F.
Briscoe, Capt. R. G. Crookshank, Capt. H. F. C. Emrys-Evans, P. V.
Brocklebank, Sir Edmund Croom-Johnson, R. P. Erskine-Hill, A. G.
Evans, D. O. (Cardigan) Loftus, P. C. Russell, Sir Alexander
Evans, E. (Univ. of Wales) Mabane, W. (Huddersfield) Russell, R. J. (Eddisbury)
Everard, W. L. MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G. Russell, S. H. M, (Darwen)
Findlay, Sir E. M'Connell, Sir J. Salmon, Sir I.
Fleming, E. L. MacDonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness) Samuel, M. R. A.
Foot, D. M. McEwen, Capt. J. H. F. Savery, Sir Servington
Furness, S. N. McKie, J. H. Scott, Lord William
Fyfe, D. P. M. Maclay, Hon. J. P. Seely, Sir H. M.
George, Major G. Lloyd (Pembroke) Macmillan, H. (Stockton-on-Tees) Selley, H. R.
Gibson, Sir C. G. (Pudsey and Otley) Maitland, A. Shaw, Major P. S. (Wavertree)
Gledhill, G. Mander, G, le M. Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)
Gluckstein, L. H. Manningham-Buller, Sir M. Shepperson, Sir E. W.
Goldie, N. B. Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R. Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir J. A.
Gower, Sir R. V. Markham, S. F. Smith, L. W. (Hallam)
Greene, W. P. C. (Worcester) Maxwell, Hon. S. A. Somervell, Sir D. B. (Crews)
Gretton, Col, Rt. Hon. J. Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J. Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Gridley, Sir A. B. Mellor, Sir J. S. P. (Tamworth) Spens, W. P.
Grimston, R. V. Mitchell, H. (Brentford and Chiswick) Stanley, Rt. Hon. Lord (Fylde)
Guest, Lieut.-Colonel H. (Drake) Moore-Brabazon, Lt.-Col. J. T. C. Stanley, Rt. Hon. Oliver (W'm'l'd)
Guest, Hon. I, (Brecon and Radnor) Morgan, R. H. Storey, S.
Guinness, T. L. E. B. Marris, J. P. (Salford, N.) Stourton, Major Hon. J. J.
Gunston, Capt. Sir D. W. Morris-Jones, Sir Henry Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)
Hambro, A. V. Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.) Sueter, Rear-Admiral Sir M. F.
Hannah, I. C. Munro, P. Tasker, Sir R. I.
Harbord, A. Nall, Sir J. Taylor, C. S. (Eastbourne)
Harris, Sir P. A. Nicolson, Hon. H. G. Thomson, Sir J. D. W.
Harvey, T. E. (Eng, Univ's.) O'Connor, Sir Terence J. Titchfield, Marquess of
Haslam, Henry (Horncastle) O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh Touche, G. C.
Haslam, Sir J. (Bolton) Orr-Ewing, I. L. Tufnell, Lieut.-Commander R. L.
Heilgers, Captain F. F. A. Owen, Major G- Turton, R. H.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P. Palmer, G. E. H. Walker-Smith, Sir J.
Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan- Peake, O. Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan
Herbert, Major J. A. (Monmouth) Peat, C. U. Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)
Higgs, W. F. Perkins, W. R. D. Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. J. W. (Ripon) Peters, Dr. S. J. Waterhouse, Captain C.
Holdsworth, H. Petherick, M. Watt, Major G. S. Harvie
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.) Pilkington, R. Wayland, Sir W. A
Hume, Sir G. H. Radford, E. A. Wells, S. R.
Hunter, T. Raikes, H. V. A. H. White, H. Graham
Jones, Sir H. Haydn (Merioneth) Ramsay, Captain A. H. M. Whiteley, Major J. P. (Buckingham)
Keeling, E. H. Ramsden, Sir E. Wickham, Lt.-Col. E. T. R.
Kerr, J. Graham (Scottish Univs.) Rankin, Sir R. Williams, H. G. (Croydon, S.)
Lamb, Sir J. Q. Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin) Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.
Law, Sir A. J. (High Peak) Reid, Sir D. D. (Down) Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Law, R. K. (Hull, S. W.) Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead) Wood, Hon. C. I. C.
Leech, Sir J. W. Reid, W. Allan (Derby) Wragg, H.
Lees-Jones, J. Rickards, G. W. (Skipton) Wright, Wing-Commander J. A. C.
Leighton, Major B. E. P. Ropner, Colonel L.
Levy, T. Ross, Major Sir R. D. (Londonderry) TELLERS FOR THE NOES,—
Liddall, W. S. Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge) Captain Hope and Major Sir
Lipson, D. L. Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R. James Edmondson.

Resolution agreed to.

Proposed words there inserted in the Bill.