HC Deb 27 May 1938 vol 336 cc1603-22

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

12.50 p.m.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

I suggest that there is no valid reason why additional taxation should be put upon a special section of the community, as is suggested by this Clause, under which special taxation is being imposed of a rather penalising character on a certain section only; and I want to raise a word of protest, not only on that point, but on the general point of the expense that is being put on the taxpayers of this country. There is no sign of cutting down expenses, but it is a case of additional, additional, and additional expenses the whole time.

Mr. E. Brown

I would point out to my hon. and gallant Friend that there is only a small sum of about £25,000 per annum which is estimated as the administrative cost to the Exchequer arising from this Bill.

Question put, and agreed to.

Clauses 14 to 17 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

FIRST SCHEDULE.—(Constitution and Proceedings of Road Haulage Wages Boards.)

12.52 p.m.

Mr. E. Brown

I beg to move, in page 17, line 8, to leave out "twelve," and to insert: not less than twelve nor more than eighteen. There is a number of Amendments on the Order Paper designed to secure that the Central Board shall be as representative as possible of all the major organisations concerned. This Amendment has a double purpose. Under the new Central Board consideration will have to be given to the names of not merely English, but Scottish organisations, and on the workers' side the Scottish Horse and Motormen's Union will have to be considered, and possibly other claims too. It will give a bigger manœuvring ground from which to make the board more representative. We shall thus be able to secure that any lack of balance in the constitution of the Central Board after the area boards' representatives have been selected, can be redressed. These are the sole purposes of the Amendment, and I am sure that all sections of the Committee will welcome it.

Amendment agreed to.

12.53 p.m.

Mr. H. G. Williams

I beg to move, in page 17, line 8, at the end, to insert: who shall not be members of the area boards. This Amendment raises, in a simple way, a principle. The Central Board in one sense is a court of appeal. Is it desirable that persons who are members of the court of first instance may also be members of the court of appeal? Should they not be a separate body of persons? I think there is much to be said for saying that the people who serve on the Central Board should not be members of an area board. It can be argued both ways, but I think that, on balance, the advantage is in favour of my Amendment. Every hon. Member can appreciate the significance of the argument.

12.54 p.m.

Mr. E. Brown

I agree that there is a balance of arguments here, but is it wise, in advance, to tie the hands of the Minister or not? The hon. Member thinks it is, but I think, on the contrary, that on the whole it is not. I can assure him that I should consult the organisations about the appointments, and I think my refusal to accept the Amendment is in the interests of the employers and the workers as well as in the interests of good administration. My hon. Friend may rest assured that we shall see that all who are affected will be consulted.

12.55 p.m.

Mr. Moreing

I see the reasonableness of the Minister's claim in this instance, but there is an increasing tendency in Bills to provide for more and more things to be done by the Minister and to leave him wide discretion. The objection in this case is not so great as in other cases, and we have every confidence in the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary, but we should protest against the increasing tendency to pass legislation leaving so much discretion to the Minister to make regulations. It is a tendency which is growing and which should be watched. Otherwise we shall have Bills on the lines of the Defence of the Realm Act merely saying that the Minister can make any regulations that he thinks fit.

Mr. Benjamin Smith

The representatives of the interests concerned will be the watchdogs of the Minister, and if he fails to do anything that the board felt reasonably right the Minister will still be subject to the criticism of this House.

12.57 p.m.

Mr. H. G. Williams

In this case the Minister's powers are very autocratic and there is no check on him whatever on the part of the organisations. I am satisfied with his assurance, although it binds only him and not his successors, who will probably be worse than he is; and I see that there is substance in the point that there may be a balance of advantage in actual practice in not doing what I suggest. My right hon. Friend wishes to keep his hands free until he has examined the actual problem arising in the appointment of individuals. There may be cases in which he may find that people who are on an area board ought obviously to be on the Central Board. For that reason I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment. I sympathise with the contention of my hon. Friend the Member for Preston (Mr. Moreing) that there is a limit to the discretion that we ought to confer on the Minister.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment made: In page 17, line 9, at the beginning, insert "representative." —[Mr. E. Brown.]

12.59 p.m.

Mr. White

I beg to move, in page 17, line 10, after "boards," to insert, "after nomination by such boards."

This is a case in which it will be a pity if the area boards, which will be in a better position to be acquainted with the personnel, are not able to decide in the first place the people who are willing and capable to render service in respect of them.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

It is true that the Area boards will have special and local knowledge. They will be appointed by the Minister and he will consult them and pay due regard to all they say, and, as far as possible, adopt what they say; but his ultimate responsibility must be maintained to see that the Central Board is a truly representative body. That is a re- sponsibility which he can scarcely delegate to another body.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

1.1 p.m.

Mr. Benjamin Smith

I beg to move, in page 17, line 11, to leave out "not less than three nor more than five," and to insert "three."

This Amendment speaks for itself. It is to provide that three people are sufficient as additional members to be appointed to the Board.

Mr. E. Brown

On the whole, I attach a good deal of importance to having the possibility of these independent members. The Central Board will have a lot of contact to make with the area boards and three is a small number. It is my intention at the start to appoint three, and if practical experience shows that there is a necessity for five, it can be considered again.

Mr. Benjamin Smith

I take it that before appointing any additional members the Minister will consult the people concerned. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. E. Brown

I beg to move, in page 17, line 15, to leave out "twelve representative members, six," and to insert: representative members other than those appointed from among members of the area boards, one half. This and the following series of Amendments are designed to secure that at any meeting of the Central Board every area shall be represented by members appointed from among the members of the area boards. In England and Wales there will be two members, one employer and one worker, appointed from among the members of each area board. It is desired that no area shall be deprived of its voice by the unavoidable absence of its member. The Amendments are put forward with the concurrence of the organisations who are parties to the existing Conciliation Board. I intend to follow the practice which is common to trade boards and other wage-negotiating machinery by making regulations providing for the equalisation of voting power between the two sides of the Central Board in the event of the number of members being present at any meeting being unequal.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made:

In page 17, line 17, leave out "six," and insert "one half."

In line 18, after "and," insert "before determining the number of such representative members and."

In line 19, leave out "representative," and insert "any such."

In line 22, after the first "the," insert "representative."

In line 27, after "workers," insert: For every member appointed under this paragraph the Minister shall appoint a substitute member who may be deputed by the member to act for him in the event of his unavoidable absence; and a substitute member while so deputed shall be deemed for all purposes to be a member of the board.

In line 28, after "member," insert "or substitute member."

In line 30, after "members," insert "and substitute members."—[Mr. E. Brown.]

1.4 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport: (Captain Austin Hudson)

I beg to move, in page 17, line 36, to leave out "mechanical".

The object of this and the following Amendment is to remove a fear that people connected with some other form of goods transport in competition with road hauliers might be appointed to serve as independent members on the Board. My right hon. Friend the Minister would not have regarded a competitor as an independent person, but in order to make the position clear the Amendment is moved.

1.5 p.m.

Mr. Benjamin Smith

I should like to thank the Minister for this Amendment, which will have the effect of eliminating possible criticism as to the associations of the independent members and ensure, what we all want, a body which is uninterested and, therefore, unbiased.

1.6 p.m.

Mr. H. G. Williams

I should like to know who will be left in if this Amendment is accepted. [Laughter.] I am quite serious about that. The paragraph says: The independent members shall be persons who in the opinion of the Minister are not connected with the mechanicle transport of goods by road. Those words will cut out every shopkeeper and, presumably, every manufacturer in the country, in fact everybody engaged in any form of trade or industry. There will be left only doctors, solicitors, architects and a few people like that. I am honestly of opinion that though the object of this Amendment may be desirable we have gone a little too far and reduced the area of selection to very narrow proportions. I ask my right hon. Friend to consider the point I have put.

1.7 p.m.

Mr. E. Brown

I will certainly look into the matter again, but every single combination of employers or workers will be represented, so I do not think the area of representation can be so very narrow, and I shall probably find it embarrassingly large.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 17, line 37, leave out "by road."—[Captain Hudson.]

1.8 p.m.

Mr. White

I beg to move, in page 18, line 2, after the first "of," to insert: three independent members, who shall be persons not connected with the transport of goods, and. There is such general harmony over the proceedings upon this Bill that it is almost impossible to imagine that when it comes into operation the same harmony will not characterise the working of its provisions, but hon. Members who have had experience of bodies such as this may be able to envisage circumstances in which the presence of three independent members may be of very great value. Deadlocks are not unknown in the course of their proceedings, and I think there is a great deal to be said from the point of view of the practical working of this body that there should be independent members upon it. We have a precedent in the Agricultural Wages Board, which I think has worked well.

1.9 p.m.

Mr. H. G. Williams

I hope that the Minister will give favourable consideration to this Amendment, which is similar in principle to one which I have upon the Paper but which has not been selected. I would remind the Committee that the Central Board is to have an independent element, and I find it difficult to understand why there should not be an independent element upon the area boards. We are going to set up area boards consisting of equal numbers from each side, and being sensible people they will, no doubt, get on in a friendly way over most of the issues which will come before them, but from time to time there will be need of an independent element. In the case of the Central Board my right hon. Friend has provided that the chairman must be selected from the independent members, and I do not understand on what grounds he has decided that on the area boards there shall be no independent members.

1.10 p.m.

Mr. Benjamin Smith

I hope that the Minister will not accept the Amendment. Under the Bill area boards have no power to initiate discussion. That is left to the Central Board, after proper consultation with the appropriate body. The independent members on the Central Board can, however, visit the area boards by request, or upon the injunction of the Minister.

Mr. H. G. Williams

Not to vote.

Mr. Smith

Not to vote, but to speak. That maintains the integrity of the Central Board. They may give advice to an area board but cannot vote, but on the Central Board they will have the right to vote. With 11 area boards and three independent members upon each, 33 independent members would have to be appointed.

1.11 p.m.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

The two Concilation Boards have expressed their point of view upon the suggestion behind this Amendment, and neither of them wishes it, and the Scottish Concilation Board in particular holds very strong views on the point. It seems to my right hon. Friend that if there should be a clash of views on an area board it would be as well that that should be brought to the notice of the Central Board rather than that an illusion of agreement should be created. Despite the eloquent arguments put forward by my hon. Friend I do not think it is desirable to accept the Amendment.

Amendment negatived.

1.13 p.m.

Mr. E. Brown

I beg to move, in page 18, line 10, after "and," to insert: before determining the number of members of which any area board is to consist and. This is a minor Amendment which is put forward after consultation with all concerned. It secures consultation with the organisations who are asking to be put into the Bill, and, of course, I desire to act in the closest possible consultation with both employers and employed.

Amendment agreed to.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

I beg to move, in page 18, line 27, at the end, to insert: 5. No person shall be entitled to serve on more than one area board either as a member or as a secretary of an area board. The object of this Amendment is to provide that a member of an area board or a secretary of an area board shall not serve upon any other area board. It is a very minor matter.

Mr. E. Brown

I think that on reflection my hon. and gallant Friend will see that the Amendment would not be advantageous, because I should think that an area board would desire to act in the closest co-operation with neighbouring area boards, and when the Ministry decide to appoint official secretaries to area boards we shall probably wish to appoint the same officer to be secretary of more than one board. This is a very convenient practice which is regularly followed in the case of the Trade Board Acts. I do not understand the object of preventing employers' or workmen's representatives from serving upon more than one board, because I think all concerned will desire to have the closest co-operation with their neighbours in the other area boards.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

That being the case, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Further Amendments made: in page 18, line 28, after "member," insert "or substitute member."

In line 29, after "or," insert "a member."—[Mr. E. Brown.]

1.16 p.m.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

I beg to move, in page 18, line 29, after "term," to insert "not exceeding three years."

The object of this Amendment is to provide that while there is continuity of policy upon the Central Board and the area boards there should be some limit to their terms of office. There is no such limit in respect of the existing National Joint Conciliation Board.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

My right hon. Friend cannot bind himself in advance to any specific period. He has already undertaken to consult the organisations concerned about the term of office of members of the Central Board and he feels that that will be adequate safeguard.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

In that case I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Further Amendment made: In page 18, line 33, at the end, insert "or substitute member."—[Mr. E. Brown.]

1.17 p.m.

Captain Hudson

I beg to move, in page 18, line 34, to leave out paragraph 7, and to insert: 7. Subject as hereinafter provided a quorum shall not be formed at a meeting of the Central Board or of an area board unless there are present at least one-third of the whole number of members appointed to represent employers and at least one-third of the whole number of members appointed to represent workers, and in the case of a meeting of the Central Board at least one of the independent members: Provided that if, at the end of half-an-hour after the time appointed for any such meeting, the quorum required by the foregoing provisions of this paragraph is not formed the meeting shall, in accordance with regulations made by the Minister, stand adjourned to a future day, and at the adjourned meeting a quorum shall be formed if at least one-third of the whole number of members of the board, exclusive of the independent members, is present and, in the case of the Central Board, at least one of the independent members is also present. The object of this Amendment is to make sure that the boards when set up are as workable as we can possibly make them. The paragraph which we propose to leave out provides that a quorum shall consist of one-third of the whole number of members of an area or of the Central Board. That provision would have permitted the meeting to consist of one side, either employers or employés and was based upon provisions relating to trade boards. It has been represented to the Minister as desirable in the present case to avoid any possibility of snap "decisions or ill-considered decisions by one side only. I gather that that cannot happen on a trade board because an independent member is always present. The Amendment is intended to meet that point and to make sure that the whole object of Part I shall not be jeopardised by the defection of one side, (that side staying away altogether). The fact that a decision of a board made by one side only would be taken into consideration by the Minister before he made the Order, makes quite certain that an awkward position would not arise in that way, but we consider that the new words are preferable to those at present in the Schedule.

Amendment agreed to.

Question, "That this Schedule, as amended, be the First Schedule to the Bill", put, and agreed to.

SECOND SCHEDULE.—(Procedure in relation to proposals of Central Board for fixing remuneration.)

1.19 p.m.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

I beg to move, in page 19, line 6, after "order," to insert "or the varying of the conditions of work."

The object of the Amendment is to provide that area boards, in addition to being able to consider proposals in relation to the fixing of remuneration or the amendment or cancellation of road haulage orders, shall be similarly empowered in relation to the conditions of work. It is a simple and straightforward proposal.

1.20 p.m.

Mr. E. Brown

I have looked into this point and I find that it will complicate the drafting and is not necessary from the point of view of administration.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

1.21 p.m.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

I beg to move, in page 19, line 7, to leave out "twenty-one" and to insert "thirty."

May I alter this wording, with permission of the Committee so as to make the Amendment read, "twenty-eight" instead of "thirty." The object of the Amendment is to provide that area boards and persons affected by the proposals of the Central Board in relation to the fixing of remuneration and the Amendment cm cancellation of road haulage or wages orders, should give 28 days instead of 21 days in which to make representation to the Central Board. This is quite a simple proposal and I hope that the Minister will be able to accept it.

1.21 p.m.

Mr. E. Brown

This is the first of five similar Amendments, which I have considered. and I am glad to be able to accept it and the succeeding one with the alteration of wording proposed by my hon. and gallant Friend. In regard to the other three, the period of 28 days is too long.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendments made: In page 19, line 7, leave out "twenty-one," and insert "twenty-eight."

In line leave out "twenty-one," and insert "twenty-eight."—[Colonel Sandman Allen.]

1.22 p.m.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

I beg to move, in page 19, line 38, to leave out: except after consultation with the area boards," and insert "unless an opportunity has been given to the area boards to make representations with respect thereto. These words are taken from the Trade Boards Act, 1909, and deal with the position that might arise in trade boards and in the case of an area board which, in order to postpone a decision, might refuse to meet. The position is unlikely to arise, but it is thought desirable to provide for it.

Amendment agreed to.

Question, "That this Schedule, as amended, be the Second Schedule to the Bill," put, and agreed to.

THIRD SCHEDULE.—(Definitions of Road Haulage Worker and Road Haulage Work.)

1.24 p.m.

Mr. E. Brown

I beg to move, in page 20, line 5, to leave out from "person," to the first "driving," in line 7, and to insert: who is employed on all or any of the following work, that is to say:— The provision of the Road and Rail Traffic Act related merely to drivers' statutory attendants. On Second Reading I explained the position, saying that the van boy was as much entitled to protection as the driver and attendant. This Amendment and the next four Amendments of this Schedule are intended to make that position clear from the point of view of administration.

Mr. H. G. Williams

I. thank the Minister for this Amendment. It is difficult to interpret it precisely, but so far as I can make it out it covers in substance the other Amendments which were tabled to this Schedule by myself and other hon. Members. I think my right hon. Friend has met all the reasonable points and I should like to thank him.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 20, line 8, leave out the first "in."

In line 9, leave out the first "in."

Leave out the second "in."

In line 10, leave out "or in."

In line 11, after "vehicle," insert: and who is required to travel on or accompany the vehicle for the purpose of doing any such work." [Mr. E. Brown.]

1.26 p.m.

Mr. E. Brown

I beg to move, in page 20, line 13, at the end, to insert: Provided that a person who is employed in loading goods to be carried in or on a goods vehicle, or in unloading goods after being so carried, and who is required to travel on or accompany the vehicle partly for that purpose, shall not be deemed to be a road naulage worker by reason only of that employment, if the main purpose for which he is required to travel on or accompany the vehicle is that of executing work other than road haulage work after its arrival at his destination.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, in line 6, after "work," to insert "before the departure of the vehicle or."

My object is to make it quite clear where the line is between being employed on the vehicle and being otherwise employed in the main. It is not quite clear in the Schedule where the line is drawn.

Mr. E. Brown

My hon. and gallant Friend has only put this Amendment on the Paper this morning. As at present advised, my view is that it is not really necessary, but perhaps my hon. and gallant Friend will allow me to consider it before the Bill goes to another place.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

I thank the Minister for what he has said, and, in the circumstances, ask leave to withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment to the proposed Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Question proposed, "That the proposed words be there inserted."

Mr. Benjamin Smith

I trust we may take it that this will not affect in any way, or be extended to, a driver or statutory attendant or mate.

Question put, and agreed to.

1.28 p.m.

Captain Hudson

I beg to move, in page 20, to leave out lines 29 to 32.

This is the paragraph of the Third Schedule which deals with meal times. It has been represented to us that it is better that these words should be left out, and that the Central Board should have a free hand in deciding the circumstances in which remuneration is paid. In the case of C licences the position under the Third Schedule will be that, if it is fair to pay no remuneration for meal times, no remuneration will be payable. I believe that the proposal has general approval.

Mr. Kelly

This is the first time I have noticed this paragraph, and I am wondering whether it goes further than remuneration. There are people who meet with accidents, particularly in this class of work, during their meal times, and I hope that this is not going to deprive the workman of his compensation. I hope that further consideration will be given to this matter, because the words of the paragraph mean that a worker shall not be deemed to be employed during meal times, when he may not be leaving his vehicle and an accident may happen to him. Do I understand that under this paragraph he would be considered not only to be not entitled to remuneration, but not entitled to compensation in case of accident?

1.30 p.m.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

I should like to thank the Minister for having given effect to the Amendments that I put on the Paper with this object. I think, if I may say so, that the idea of the hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr. Kelly) is a wrong one. The proposal is that these words should be deleted, and, therefore if, the Amendment is accepted, the man will be deemed to be employed. There must be some sense of responsibility for the vehicle during meal times. I think the hon. Member has misread the Amendment.

1.31 p.m.

Mr. Pritt

I think there is good ground for anxiety here. It is true that the Workmen's Compensation Act leaves it to be decided what arises out of or in the course of the employment, and what happens during meal times in some circumstances may, and in some circumstances may not, be regarded as arising out of or in the course of the employment. Paragraph 2 of the Schedule reads: For the purpose of determining the road haulage work for which statutory remuneration may be fixed under this Act, a road haulage worker shall be deemed to be employed on road haulage work "— and so on. This, of course, is not amending the Workmen's Compensation Act in any way, but it will provide solicitors and barristers who have to argue cases for employers with a serious argument which they will have to use. They will be able to say that the question is whether the worker is doing this in the course of his employment, and here is a Statute which deals with another subject, and which ought, perhaps, not to be pressed too far, but which still says definitely that at that time, for their purposes at any rate, he was not doing it in the course of his employment. Then they will say to the judge, "If he is not doing it for one purpose, it would be odd if he were doing it for another purpose." I am certain that no one wants the Workmen's Compensation Act to be affected, and I suggest that the matter needs careful consideration.

Mr. E. Brown

It seems to me that the point is an unreal one, because what we are proposing here is that the words in question shall be taken out.

Mr. Tinker

Can we have an assurance that this will not affect workmen's compensation?

Mr. Brown

I have taken advice on the point, and am advised that it will not.

Amendment agreed to.

Question, "That this Schedule, as amended, be the Third Schedule to the Bill," put, and agreed to.

Bill reported, with Amendments.

1.34 p.m.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

On a point of Order. I understand that it is proposed to take the Report stage now. The Committee stage of the Bill has only just this minute finished, and the Minister has undertaken to consider several matters between the Committee stage and the Report stage. We have hardly had time to think what action we ought to take on Report, and I would suggest to the House that it would be better that the Report stage should be taken later.

Mr. E. Brown

I would point out that the arrangement to take all the remaining stages of the Bill in one day has not been made by the desire of the Minister, but has been accepted in all quarters of the House, and I would remind the House that, in undertaking to give further consideration to certain points, I distinctly said that that would be, not on Report, but during later stages of the Bill. I am sure it is the earnest desire that this legislation should be put into effect as quickly as possible, and to that end the agreement was arrived at through the usual channels.

1.35 p.m.

Mr. Wedgwood Benn

We do not raise any objection. But I think it is a very good thing that the hon. and gallant Member raised the point he did, because otherwise the Report stage becomes nugatory, as there is no time for amendment. Also, I object very strongly to it being said to this House, which is a self-contained assembly, that things may be done in another place.

Mr. Pritt

Where they are always voting against the Government.

1.36 p.m.

Mr. H. G. Williams

I think that, in view of the fact that the Bill has undergone a considerable amount of amendment and that a number of undertakings have been given by the Minister, it is undesirable in principle that the further stages should be taken now; but I realise that this Bill is the first expression of a popular front we have seen, because it is the hon. Member for Rotherhithe (Mr. Benjamin Smith) and my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour who have run things this morning. The only occasion when Amendments have been accepted has been when one or other of them nodded his head; and the rest of us have only endorsed what they have done. I would like to congratulate them. [Interruption.] I take it we are discussing the Third Reading.

Mr. Deputy-Speaker (Sir Dennis Herbert)

The hon. Gentleman who thinks the House is going too fast is himself going faster than the House. We have only got to the question whether the Report stage should be taken now.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

I raised a point of Order, as to whether we should take the Report stage.

Mr. Deputy-Speaker

The hon. and gallant Member rose to a point of Order, and some remarks were made upon it; but if that matter is to be debated, as to whether the consideration stage is to be taken or not, that must be done on a Motion.

Mr. Moreing

On a futher point of Order. This is an extraordinary procedure, if I may say so—

Mr. Deputy-Speaker

I have just pointed out that we cannot debate that matter. The hon. Member who rose just now thought that we were on the Third Reading.

Mr. Moreing

We have discussed this Bill in Committee this morning, certain Amendments have been made; now the proposal will come before us that in a few minutes we should discuss the Third Reading. We have had no opportunity of seeing a Paper with the Amendments on it.

Mr. Deputy-Speaker

That is a point which has been already made, and I pointed out that if the question whether the Report stage is to be taken now or not is to be debated it must be on a Motion; otherwise I must put the Question, "That the Bill, as amended, be now considered."

1.39 p.m.

Mr. E. Brown

I beg to move, "That the Bill, as amended, be now considered.

If hon. Members will turn back to the Debate on Thursday of last week, they will note that it was clearly arranged in the House that all stages of the Bill should be taken to-day. That was arranged through the usual channels.

1.40 p.m.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

The Minister has just pointed out to us that on Thurs- day of last week it was arranged that all stages should be taken to-day. At that time no Amendment had appeared on the Order Paper. (An hon. Member: "Oh, yes"). I think it will be found that I am quite right; it was not until the next day that Amendments appeared on the Paper. That makes a considerable difference in the arrangements of the House. A considerable number of Amendments have appeared to-day, they have been accepted, and the question now is whether we shall have a Report stage. I do not want to be obstreperous, but I think we must consider these things more carefully, and not rush them through. I withdraw my objection now.

Question, "That the Bill, as amended, be now considered," put, and agreed to.

Bill considered accordingly.

1.42 p.m.

Mr. E. Brown

I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

This is, as the atmosphere of the House shows, a Bill which, in the true sense, is approved in every quarter of the House. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for West Birkenhead (Colonel Sandeman Allen), who moved a number of Amendments to-day, has performed a great public service in drawing attention to various points to which attention ought to be drawn. This Bill affects 250,000 owners of licences, and between 500,000 and 600,000 road haulage workers. Experience in connection with the Joint Industrial Council in the last five years has shown that the position in this industry has been very difficult indeed. Now agreement has been reached, and I look forward to seeing a very great change in the lot of the workers of this most important modern industry as the Bill works out in practice. I wish to thank all those, both in the House and outside, who, in the course of very long and detailed technical negotiations, have made it possible for us to produce the Bill now in shape so largely agreed in all quarters.

1.43 P.m.

Mr. Benjamin Smith

I rise to support the Motion. While I agree that, in general, it is undesirable to take the Report stage of a Bill that has only been before the House as a Bill on behalf of the Government, this Bill has had many months, if not years, of discussion before coming to the House, during which it has been possible to obtain a measure of agreement which has brought all parties together. I want to support the Bill, as one who, at any rate, since I came ashore, has lived with this industry. Many hundreds, if not thousands, think what a pity it is that an industry of this magnitude should be so poorly organised that it should have to have what is called safety legislation imposed upon it. That is not imposed because of the good employers, but because of the employers who will not face their responsibilities to their workers.

The Bill is obligatory as it stands to-day, yet it has within it the germs of voluntary organisation. I look forward to the day when the penal side can be done away with, and when the people whom I have seen for many years suffering up and down the roads will see, and their employers will see, the necessity and virtue of joining together in a voluntary association to affect what is right and equitable in this industry and its competitors in other industries. I am not in the habit of giving excessive praise, but I think it is only fair to thank the Minister and his staff, who have done so much behind the scenes, Mr. Edwards, who is the employers' representative on the Central Board, and my general secretary, Mr. Ernest Bevin, who have put in much time to bring this to fruition. I hope that when the Bill goes to another place, it will be carried with facility, and without Amendment.

1.45 p.m.

Colonel Sandeman Allen

I would not like to part with this Bill without saying how very glad I am that it has advanced on its way towards the Statute Book. I believe it will go a very long way towards creating a more harmonious position in the transport industry in general, and not merely the road haulage industry. It is a step towards getting a rates agreement and will, therefore, enable us to get a far more harmonious arrangement interlocking all the necessary transport in the country on lines which will be beneficial to the country as a whole. I am grateful to the Committee for the help that they have given, and I assure the House that when in Committee I moved a number of Amendments it was not done from the point of view of wrecking the Bill at all, but of improving it and elucidating from the Minister some of the explanations which we required. I congratulate the Minister on the way he is helping this Bill on its way to the Statute Book and I give it my blessing. I assure him that I trust him to see that the things we want altering in the Bill will be altered in another place.

1.46 p.m.

Mr. Moreing

I do not want any misapprehension to get about that I am in any way opposed to this Bill. I believe it to be a very good and necessary Bill and one which will do great good to a very large portion of the community. We ought to congratulate the Minister of Labour, hon. Members opposite who have taken an interest in the Bill and also the movers of Amendments, all of whom have striven to get the Measure through this House. I must, however, protest against the Third Reading being taken to-day. I realise that it happens, because the Committee stage was got through extraordinarily quickly, that we are to have the Third Reading to-day, and that it is not a Bill on which there is any controversy. But I view with apprehension the way in which legislation is being forced through this House. At the beginning of every Session we have the King's Speech outlining a terrific programme of legislation, and then, half way through the Session, matters arise, perhaps in connection with industry or international affairs, which throw the time-table out of control. The consequence is that we get into such a position as that in which we are to-day, where we have a Bill, in which Amendments have been made in Committee, to be read the Third time without further consideration. These Bills are complicated enough when drawn in the first instance, and when Amendments have been made, they are still more complicated and difficult to understand.

We have not had an opportunity of seeing this Bill, as amended, in print. The Minister has given an undertaking that Amendments will be put into the Bill in another place, and we shall be asked to consider those Amendments when the Bill comes back to the House. I say with respect that, when we come to consider Amendments from another place, they are read out from the Table, and it is sometimes difficult to follow them, and the Bill goes through, and is perhaps not the best that could have been drafted. Litigation arises out of it, and the matter goes into the court and the Judges in the High Court in their judgments, make comments on the way the Act has been drafted. I am not saying this with the object of obstructing the Bill at all, because I am entirely in favour of it, but it is treating the Members of this House with a certain lack of consideration to give us the Report stage, on which it has been impossible in practice to move any Amendments, and then to move the Third Reading. I hope in these serious times, when Parliamentary Government is being criticised so much all over the world and in this country, hon. Members will stand up for their rights in this matter.

Question, "That the Bill be now read the Third time," put, and agreed to.

Bill read the Third time, and passed.