HC Deb 06 July 1939 vol 349 cc1644-6

10.28 p.m.

Mr. Cross

I beg to move, in page 37, line 26, to leave out "forming an integral part of" and to insert: which forms part of or is situate in the same cotton mill as. Certain processes are exempted under this Amendment and the next Amend- ment but one, from the definitions of "spinning" and "doubling," when those processes are performed on machinery which, in the words of the Bill, "forms an integral part of" the plant used by other industries. Those words are too restrictive, and would exclude those processes only where there was a physical connection between the machinery on which they were per formed, and the other machinery. The words which we propose to insert in place of "forming an integral part of" would exempt such processes when they are carried out on machinery which is situated in the same mills as the plant used by the other industries.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Cross

I beg to move, in page 37, line 39, to leave out "unless the process," and to insert: except so far as the treatment of yarn in the manner mentioned in this paragraph. The doubling processes defined in this Clause are carried out by a number of industries besides the cotton industry. As the Clause is drafted only a limited number of the ancillary processes of doubling are exempted processes. The joint committee in consultation with the other industries concerned, have agreed that all processes ancillary to doubling, when carried out by industries other than the cotton industry, shall be excepted, and this Amendment gives effect to that agreement.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 38, line 1, leave out "forming an integral part of," and insert: which forms part of, or is situate in the same cotton mill as."—[Mr. Cross.]

10.30 p.m.

Mr. Sexton

I beg to move, in page 39, line 38, after "finishing," to insert: and that the packeting of surgical cloths and the labelling of such cloths to indicate that they are intended for surgical and therapeutic purposes, or for the purposes of personal hygiene, shall not be deemed to be making-up or packing. As the right hon. Gentleman has already accepted the additional words "surgical dressings" in Clause 27, I am hoping that he is going to stand up and say that this proposal is consequential, because that is a word which I find usually causes Amendments to pass through. I just want to draw his attention to these pro ducts. I said they are non-competitive with the products which come under the Bill, and the Amendment is to ensure that the packeting and labelling of those pro ducts shall not come under the activities mentioned in Sub-section (2) of this Clause. Perhaps the words are not the best possible, but I am hoping that the right hon. Gentleman will give some assurance.

Mr. W. Joseph Stewart

I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. Cross

As the hon. Member anticipated, the precise words are not accept able, but the idea which they convey is acceptable, and I would suggest that he should withdraw this Amendment. The same remark applies to the next following Amendment. Perhaps he will leave it to my right hon. Friend to see that an Amendment having the same effect but in acceptable words is moved in another place.

Mr. Sexton

I shall be glad to with draw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.