§ Mr. Elliot
I beg to move, in page 5, line 13, at the end, to insert:(3) This Section shall apply in relation to the Deposit Contributors Insurance Section and the Navy, Army and Air Force Insurance Fund respectively as if they were approved societies.This Amendment will make the provisions in the Bill regarding sickness payment apply to insured women who are members of the Deposit Contributors Fund (Insurance Section) and the Navy, Army, and Air Force Insurance Fund, which are not actually approved societies although they are of the nature of approved societies. The Insurance Act authorises the making of regulations specifying the provisions of that Act which are to apply to the funds as if they were approved societies, but the present Bill is not part of the Insurance Act. It is necessary therefore to specify that the provisions of the Bill for financing sickness payments by the transfer of reserves to this Special Suspense Fund shall also apply to these two Insurance Funds.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. Elliot
I beg to move, in page 5, line 16, at the end, to insert: 2199and such amounts as may be determined, in accordance with the regulations made by the National Health Insurance Joint Committee, to be the amounts chargeable in respect of expenses in connection with the administration of such payments.
§ This is a drafting Amendment.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. Elliot
I beg to move, in page 5, line 19, at the end, to add:(5) If provision is made by any enactment of the Parliament of Northern Ireland appearing to His Majesty substantially to correspond to the provisions of this Part of this Act, His Majesty may by Order in Council make provision for the payment into the Special Suspense Fund of such sums as may be provided by the said enactment and direct that the provisions of this Section relating to the payment out of that fund of sums expended on sicknes payments and expenses in connection with the administration of such payments shall, with or without modifications, extend to Northern Ireland.It has been already announced in the Northern Ireland Parliament that a corresponding Bill will be introduced in that Parliament. The hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) raised a question whether that Bill would vary from the provisions of this Bill. I should think the answer would certainly be "Yes." It would not be an identical Bill but a Bill similar to this one. If that Bill provides for the transfer of the reserves of Northern Ireland Approved Societies into the Special Suspense Fund under Clause 4 it will be proper that sickness payments to women members should be paid out of that fund. This Amendment provides that by Order-in-Council Clause 4 (3) of the Bill may be extended with or without modifications to Northern Ireland.
§ 9.50 p.m.
§ Mr. T. Henderson
I am reminded that a few years ago a bright and shining light in the present Government was invited to Northern Ireland, and he came back to this House and asked the British taxpayers to pay a sum of £4,000,000 to the Northern Ireland Government for the purpose of making their Insurance Fund solvent. I am afraid that by the use of the word "substantially" in this Amendment we may have a repetition of what took place at that time. It is quite true that at that time the Minister received from the Northern Ireland Parliament a shillelagh and a cutty pipe, but £4,000,000 was rather a long price for the British taxpayer to pay. If the Minister would agree to drop the word 2200 "substantially," I think the Amendment would be acceptable, but if that word is kept in, I would suggest that hon. Members on this side of the Committee should oppose it.
§ 9.52 p.m.
§ Sir W. Allen
The reference made by the hon. Member to £4,000,000 may be humorous, but I think hon. Members ought to remember that in Northern Ireland we pay taxes identically the same as are paid here. It is only right therefore that we should participate in the case of moneys transferred from our Exchequer to the Exchequer here. We now have an opportunity in Northern Ireland of giving to the people of Northern Ireland whatever benefits there may be under this Bill.
§ Mr. Messer
Is not the meaning of this Amendment that the peculiar circumstances of Northern Ireland may make it impossible to have exactly the same legislation there, but that it will be expected that there will be no wide departure from the legislation here? Therefore, the word "substantially" is necessary because although the legislation may not be identical it must be as nearly the same as is possible.
§ 9.54 p.m.
§ Mr. Elliot
I think that roughly that is so. The hon. Member for Gorbals (Mr. Buchanan) himself drew attention, I think, to the undesirability of laying down that the provisions in the Bill should be identical in each country. If it is undesirable that the two sets of legislation should be identical I think it will be agreed that they should be substantially the same so that they may be brought into harmony. If they were widely different they could not be harmonious, but it would be wrong to enact something that said that unless in every respect the Northern Ireland Act corresponded identically we would not have anything to do with it.
§ 9.55 p.m.
§ Mr. McEntee
I hope the Minister will find a better word than "substantially." After all, I might say that 4d. was a substantial part of is., but the Minister might say that a substantial part of is. was 8d. The word "substantially" could be interpreted in a number of ways. I suggest that perhaps "closely" would be a better word to use. I am a little 2201 afraid that something similar to what my hon. Friend the Member for Tradeston (Mr. T. Henderson) has described may happen. It is true that £4,000,000 was given by the taxpayers of this country to Northern Ireland.
§ The Chairman
I very nearly called the hon. Member for Tradeston (Mr. T. Henderson) to Order when he was referring to that matter. I would point out to the hon. Member that the word "substantially" in the Amendment has nothing to do with figures.
§ Mr. McEntee
I merely want to say that I hope that between now and the Report stage the Minister will find a better word than "substantially." There is one other point to which I want to refer. The Minister used the word "may." If he had used the same word in connection with the matter we discussed on the last Amendment, it would have been very much better. In the case of this Amendment, the word is not "may," as the Minister said, but "shall."
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
§ 9.57 p.m.
§ Mr. Rhys Davies
Hon. Members will notice that the object of this Clause is the adjustment of the reserves of approved societies. I should like to read a passage from that part of the Actuary's report which relates to this Clause.In respect of existing insured persons, approved societies with female members will be relieved of a considerable liability by the termination of the right to sickness and disablement benefits at the age of 60, since hitherto their reserves have been maintained on the basis that these benefits would continue until the age of 65.Apart from those who receive transitional sickness benefits between the ages of 60 and 65, women will ordinarily drop out of approved societies at the age of 60 because they will be in receipt of a pension of 10s. a week at that age. This will release a great deal of the reserves that are held by approved societies in respect of these women who would otherwise continue their membership until 65 years of age. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will be good enough to make clear one point in respect of these women who draw a pension at 60. They will be entitled to 2202 medical benefit throughout life. I believe I am right in saying that approved societies who can afford it pay some forms of additional benefits to male insured persons over 65 years of age, in addition to the medical benefit to which they are entitled for life. I notice that in Clause 4, Sub-section (1), there is a reference to "other than additional benefits," and although the words I have quoted refer to women who are to receive transitional sickness benefits, I am still wondering whether any kind of additional benefits will be payable to women in general from 60 years of age upwards.
I want, once again, to pay a tribute to the Civil Service on the clever way in which they put through these things to cover up the many tricks that Government plays on Parliament. This is one of them. The money that is to be released by virtue of the fact that these women go out of the approved societies is to be utilised according to Sub-section (4) of this Clause—The residue of the sums standing to the credit of the Special Suspense Fund shall be dealt with in such manner as Parliament may hereafter determine.I will explain to the Committee what that means in the language of the Actuary—The provision needed for these benefits"—that is, the transitional benefits—is necessarily very speculative, and I estimate with some reserve that the sums required will amount to between £750,000 and £1,000,000 in the aggregate, and that accordingly the amount of the balance remaining to be dealt with thereafter will be rather less than £3,000,000.I want to direct the attention of the Committee to that sum, a little less than £3,000,000, which is to be released from the funds of the approved societies consequent upon the fact that women between the ages of 60 and 65 will no longer be entitled to sickness and disablement benefits. What is it intended to do with this money? It is to be left in the suspense account until Parliament decides what to do with it. I remember the present First Lord of the Admiralty, when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, coming down to the House and asking us to tighten our belts. Some people were asked to tighten their belts who had no belts left to tighten. The Budget was in difficulty, and the right hon. Gentleman reduced the subsidy to 2203 the approved societies by about £2,250,000 per annum. Those who are connected with approved societies are a little afraid, therefore, that they may be called upon once again to do something in the nature of tightening their belts to assist the Treasury. At the present rate of national expenditure, I am not sure that the demand may not come upon us fairly soon. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer finds out from this Debate and from the Actuary's report that there is available somewhere a sum of £2,750,000, I am almost certain what he will do with it. He will lift it from this Special Suspense Fund and put it to the credit of his own account in the Budget. That is the kind of trick that will be played on us. I appeal to the right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Health to do one thing, and I do not care at what stage of the Bill he does it. I think he ought to take that Sub-section out of the Clause and leave the £2,750,000 which is released in the funds of the approved societies.
My hon. Friends have been referring to the cases of insured women who are drawing disablement benefits. The most pathetic person in this country is not of necessity the old age pensioner, but the single woman in receipt of disablement benefit from an approved society without a penny piece coming in beyond 6s. a week. I know full well that this £2,750,000 would not add very much to that 6s. I am connected with a society with 15,000 female members. I cannot tell how many of them are on disablement benefit with only 6s. a week, but there must be tens of thousands in all the societies who have gone through their sickness benefit of 26 weeks with probably 12s., 13s. or 15s. a week, as the case may be, and have dropped down to 6s. a week as long as they live. That is the most pathetic little creature that I know in society. I again appeal to the right hon. Gentleman to use his power so that this £2,750,000 shall be utilised to increase the 6s. even if only by 6d. a week. That does not sound much but it means an enormous sum in a household where the income is small.
There is, of course, a consultative council in existence, and the right hon. Gentleman is able to consult through that body the representatives of all forms of approved societies. I am sure 2204 that that consultative council, if it were asked to give its opinion on this subject, would say exactly what I have said, though in better language than I can employ. Probably the right hon. Gentleman will say that he has consulted this body. I do not want to be offensive to him, because I want to get him into his very best mood on this issue. But he knows as well as I do that all that Ministers of Health do with that body is to consult it. It never follows that the Minister does anything that the consultative council desires him to do. That, of course, is the failing of all these bodies that are subject to Government appointment. I appeal once again for these tragic women living on 6s. a week disablement benefit. The terrible thing about sickness and total incapacity is this: You can organise spinsters and old age pensioners, because they are vocal and can attend meetings, but these tens of thousands of women on their sick beds are never able to voice their opinions collectively anywhere; in what I have said I have ventured to say a word on their behalf to-night.
§ 10.10 p.m.
§ Mr. Tomlinson
There are one or two aspects of this question to which I should like to ask the Minister to give a little more consideration before he finally decides upon this drafting of the Clause. One of the principal arguments levelled against the National Health Insurance scheme is being perpetuated by this Clause. In the first Sub-section it is proposed that each approved society having women among its members shall be credited with the amount it shall be adjudged to save as a consequence of women passing out of insurance at 60 instead of 65. My principal objection to national insurance is that it is not national at all, and that the benefits payable by an insurance society are determined to a large extent by the character of the individuals who are insured. You can find societies which are to-day paying large additional benefits to their members. I can find a society which under this will receive the amount that it will gain, and it will be added to their fund. Yet those societies are in a position to pay optical and dental benefit, and sometimes an additional amount of sickness benefit. There are many societies in that fortunate position. But the strange thing is that where the need is greatest the money available is least, and the people 2205 who are responsible particularly for the organisation of married women in their insurance societies are the very people who are being hardest hit by this Measure and are not in a position to pay additional benefits at all.
Take my own society, the Amalgamated Weavers Approved Society. For years we have been working on the minimum benefit. There have been no additional benefits. The consequence has been all the time that, when members come asking for the benefits which other people are deriving from what is a national insurance scheme, we have had to tell them that those benefits were not available. They have said, "What a blue pencil society." Not once but a thousand times that has happened in our experience, and this is perpetuating it at a time when those very benefits could come to the societies as the result of improvements in the financial structure coming through this change which is taking place in the reduction of the age. Surely at such a time it would have been better to decide that this money which is to be available should be set aside for a definite purpose. In my judgment in these times, I was almost going to say with a Chancellor of the Exchequer such as we have, it is criminal to leave this lying about in this way. We pray, "Lead us not into temptation," and then leave £2,750,000 lying about when the Chancellor is looking for it. It is asking for it to be pinched.
That is what it amounts to, and it would not be the first time that it has happened. I seem to remember something about a Road Fund which had been specifically paid into for a given purpose but was not used for that purpose, and there is no guarantee in this Sub-section that the special suspense fund shall be used to benefit the people who have paid it. All it says is that it shall be dealt with in such manner as Parliament may hereafter determine. There is no reason why this £2,750,000 should not be voted by Parliament for that purpose. It could be done within the Clause.
My contention is that the money is being saved directly out of the contributions of the people who are paying for something which they will not get when they reach the age of 60. I am not at all satisfied after reading through the previous Clause that the women who have 2206 paid these sums will receive just treatment.
I know it may be possible to meet the special case which has been put up, but in the regulation in which this suspense account is dealt with the word "may" and not "shall" appears. If it can be proved that hardship exists then a special committee "may" make a regulation in order to deal with it. That means also that they may not. First, you have to determine what is a hardship before you can determine to make a regulation to deal with it, and if the Commimttee contends there that no hardship exists there is no need to make a regulation to deal with it.
This saving which is said to be £2,750,000 should really be £4,750,000, because when you have written off £2,000,000 which is supposed to be owing it does not mean, that simply because it happens to be paper money, you have liquidated your debt to the societies. I contend that the people in those societies which cater mainly for the women in industry are entitled to just as much benefit as other sections of the insured population. They are not getting it. They are getting only what the scheme can actually afford to pay them. If an alteration is being made surely those people who have contributed to the amount ought to be the first and the only persons to benefit. There is nothing in this Clause to prevent Parliament deciding that extra benefits should be given to men in any approved society out of this £2,750,000; or nothing to prevent Parliament deciding that as many societies are not in a position to give optical treatment to their members, this suspense account can be used to make the insured population far-sighted and provide everyone with spectacles. In that way, you can divert it from the people who have paid into the fund to the benefit of the men.
I could have understood this Clause if it had been suggested that this sum should be kept in a suspense account especially for the people by whom it was being paid. All the saving is being made out of the women, and very unfairly in my judgment. The married woman in industry is paying twice for one benefit all the time her husband is alive, because while she is paying as a married woman she is a potential widow, and her poten- 2207 tial widowhood is covered out of her husband's insurance.
§ Mr. Tomlinson
The point I was making is that the £2,750,000 is not being saved as a consequence of the changes that are taking place, but that it arises through the refusal of the Government to accept for benefit payments that have been made for married women who are insured with their husbands, the spinster class up to 60 years of age and the widow. So that the amount of money which these women are paying is a contribution towards that sum. An attempt is being made in Clause 3 to deal with the special case of the widow. I am arguing that if the widow's case is met, as was suggested on the last Clause, by the provision of a new regulation, the case of the married woman, who, for 40 years may have been paying twice for one benefit, has not been met by this Clause, and that she is entitled to a come-back because she has kept her husband alive.
That sounds strange, but it is true. She is paying all the time, and therefore she is entitled when she reaches 60 to be reimbursed for the contributions she has made and for which she draws nothing. If the husband dies before she reaches 60, she is at once paid 10s. out of her husband's contributions. Either one is actuarially sound or the other is not. If the scheme is actuarially sound from the standpoint of the widow who is receiving the pension, it is over-capitalised from the standpoint of the married woman. I suggest that the Government should think again as to what should be done with the surplus, and that they should begin by regularising benefits under National Health Insurance so that it will be national instead of piecemeal and so that the women who have contributed this money should be given a fair share of that which they have contributed.
§ 10.24 p.m.
§ Mr. Elliot
I understand the hon. Member to be saying that he does not object to the Clause generally but that, as the hon. Member for Westhoughton (Mr. Rhys Davies) said, he does not like the words in Sub-section (4). Otherwise he has no objection to it. Am I right?
§ Mr. Rhys Davies
We had an Amendment on the Paper to delete these objectionable words. It was not called, and our only alternative is to oppose the Clause as a whole.
§ Mr. Elliot
I think I am not doing the hon. Member an injustice. I took it that his party were advancing arguments on the Clause as a whole because it had not been possible to get the Amendment discussed. But surely the Government are entitled to praise rather than censure from hon. Members opposite for the insertion of these words in Sub-section (4)? If the words were deleted it would not make any difference. If the words "the matter shall be dealt with in such manner as Parliament may hereafter determine" were to disappear all that would have happened would be that the label, so to speak, would have been taken off this strong box, but the strong box would remain. The £2,750,000 or £3,000,000 which has accrued for the benefits which would have been payable by the approved societies has been placed in a strong box by the Government to be dealt with in such manner as Parliament may determine, and that is the only way in which these moneys can be dealt with. I claim that we are entitled to gratitude and not blame for having done this.
The hon. Member for Farnworth (Mr. Tomlinson) seemed to indicate that people were suffering some injury for which they should be recompensed. The fact is that under this Bill women are receiving benefits ten times as great as they are surrendering. We have increased enormously the actuarial value of the benefits which are being provided, and very largely with money provided by Parliament. The hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) asked me what was the value of the present rights of an insured woman, and I promised to get him the figures. Here they are. The present value of the pension rights of a woman aged 40 is £69. When we have put through this Bill it will be increased by no less than £42. That is not a diminution of anything that is coming to the woman. The present value of the pension rights of a woman aged 60 is £196. When this Bill reaches the Statute Book we shall have added £113 to that sum.
§ Mr. Glenvil Hall
Has the right hon. Gentleman taken off the amount that the 2209 woman will not now get in relation to sickness benefits?
§ Mr. Elliot
Of course I have. Further it is not merely what I have taken into account but what the Government Actuary has taken into account. There is a long report on the subject. There is a very great advantage to the woman. She is getting ten times the value of the health insurance rights that are being commuted. I have given the actuarial values of the new pension rights first in the case of a younger woman and then in the case of an older woman. In the case of the younger woman the present value of £69 is being raised by £42, and the value in the case of a woman of 60 is being increased by £113. The hon. Member asked about the £2,750,000 and said, "Do not let us leave it here or the Chancellor of the Exchequer will hear about it." Does the hon. Member think that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would make a speech before the introduction of the Bill and another on its Second Reading without somebody having first done a few sums and discovered this £2,750,000 which is being released from the funds of the approved societies? Surely he does not believe that this money has not been argued over time and time again, and that the fact that we are receiving in contributions £100,000,000 and incurring a liability of £260,000,000, so that the Treasury contribution is £160,000,000, has not been discussed by the Treasury time and again—with the very natural suggestion that some of this money should be swept forthwith into the Treasury? I am not denying that that is, so. These sums have naturally been canvassed repeatedly by the Treasury as sums appropriate to be devoted towards strengthening it for the great liabilities which will have to be met.
§ Mr. Rhys Davies
Does the right hon. Gentleman really think it is straightforward finance to suggest that £2,750,000, set aside from contributions for sickness, medical and maternity benefits, should be handed over to the Treasury to make good the deficiencies of a pension scheme quite apart from health insurance?
§ Mr. Elliot
Not at all. Everybody knows that the funds of the societies were gathered for health benefits and that 2210 a great relief is taking place in the liabilities of the approved societies as a result of the legislation that we are putting through and with the Financial Resolution that we passed last night. Not only is it straight finance but it would be quite wrong not to consider whether that money should, in turn, be brought in to buttress the funds against the great and serious burdens which are being laid upon it by this legislation. So meticulous were the Government to ensure that no such reproach as suggested by the hon. Member should be brought against them, and that there should be no shadow of a suspicion of sharp practice or sixpence-squeezing that they have specifically enacted that these moneys should be placed in a strong box of which Parliament holds the key, and should not be forthwith swept into the Treasury but dealt with as Parliament might determine. I suggest that that is wise and prudent finance and the hon. Gentleman is totally wrong.
He said: "Go to the consultative council of the approved societies and hear what they say." Will he be surprised to hear that I have gone to the consultative council of the approved societies, and that in the approved societies there were views on both sides? Certain opinion said that the money should be dealt with as the hon. Gentleman suggested, but there were other views. Some said that with the demand coming on the approved societies in respect of contingent liability to meet this sickness payment, with other disadvantages and liabilities coming along, they would say: "This is the moment to conserve our finances and put money to reserve to make sure that we shall be able, in future, to deal with the problems that may come upon our finances." But many of the members of the consultative committee themselves suggested that the action of the Government was right. That is all the more necessary because the argument of the hon. Gentleman suggested that it was not to our advantage and that the money should go to the single woman—to the spinster. That is not where the improvement in life is taking place.
§ Mr. Elliot
He said that he was speaking particularly of those women who were drawing disablement benefit and who were not married.
§ Mr. Davies
The right hon. Gentleman must not mislead the Committee. I said, following on that statement, that I knew of no more pathetic figure than that of the woman who was single, drawing disablement benefit and had been totally incapacitated for several years.
§ Mr. Elliot
I say that the experience of recent years shows that the unmarried women's claims for sickness benefit have been a little in excess of expectation. It is with married women that the position in regard to sickness benefit is more satisfactory. I could understand indications of disapproval from hon. Members opposite if we took advantage of the present position by still further improving the position of the married women and depressing the position of the single women. The money is being placed in reserve against the incalculable fortunes of the future, and none of us can say what is the most appropriate use to which this money can be placed. What we can say is that the women are receiving very great, definite and calculable benefits as the result of the action which the Committee is taking this evening.
I would like to deal with some other points which have been raised. It was suggested that this might be an appropriate occasion on which to pool the funds of the approved societies. The hon. Gentleman knows as well as I do the sort of storm that would arise up and down the country if that were done. He knows that all the storms we have had in connection with other matters would be nothing compared with what would arise if it was said that the war is a grand occasion on which to pool the funds of the approved societies.
§ Mr. Tomlinson
Was that the cause of the dispute in the consultative committee, because of the various approved societies who do not cater for women workers?
§ Mr. Elliot
The hon. Gentleman is dealing with another point. I noticed that the hon. Gentleman wished to intervene, and I thought he was going to intervene on the argument that I was addressing to the Committee at the 2212 moment. I do not wish to detain the Committee, but I will take note of the points which have been raised. I would say that we are unrepentant as to the course which we have taken. We are not sweeping money forthwith into the Treasury, but by placing it into a reserve account we are acting wisely, and I ask the Committee to take that view. Hon. Members having heard my explanations, I hope that we can pass from this Clause.
§ 10.37 p.m.
§ Mr. Isaacs
I have heard the phrase about not bowing down and worshipping any graven image. We can see the Treasury Bench bowing down and worshipping the Actuary. Like other actuaries, the Actuary who produced these figures has left a hole by which it is possible to escape from them, because he said they were speculative and had been made with some reserve. In estimating the sickness of married women many years ago the Actuary made a similar mistake to that which is being made now. If there is to be any saving out of this new scheme why not let it remain to balance the losses that have already occurred in the women's societies? I am the secretary of a society for women, a society where it can be said that we know almost every one of those women, and time after time when our sickness details have come out we have had people from the Ministry trying to find out why there is this heavy sickness amongst women. These are some of the reasons why most of the societies for married women are not able to give additional benefit. We should have some guarantee that any surplus moneys shall not be taken under any circumstances until those societies which have suffered from the sickness experience of these women have had the reserve values made up to the experience of those who have had the average sickness experience.
§ 10.40 p.m.
§ Mr. McEntee
I should like to be able to think that the Government were honest in regard to this Clause, but if they were, they would at least say what they propose to do with this money. Everybody knows what is meant by the words, to which a great deal of reference has been made:as Parliament may hereafter determine.What can that mean, except what it always has meant in practice? That is, 2213 that the Government will determine, and that, having determined, they will put the Whips on, and their supporters will vote as they are told to do. If there were a free vote on the matter, I do not believe that Parliament would permit the Chancellor of the Exchequer to use the money for any other purpose than that for which it was subscribed—for the benefit of the members of the approved societies. If the Government were really honest in what they said when we discussed the previous Clause, that they were anxious that all the benefits of the members of the approved societies should be guaranteed to them, and that, between the ages of 60 arid 65, those members should not lose as a consequence of this Act, they would take steps to secure that.
The Clause begins by saying, in effect, that the Government Actuary shall estimate and certify what amount has been saved by the approved societies in consequence of the Act, and that such amount shall be discharged by cancelling outstanding reserve values to that amount, and it goes on to say that the surplus shall
be used as Parliament shall determine, after it has been put into the Suspense Fund. It is asked, Why should it not be used by the Chancellor of the Exchequer? I answer, Why should it be used by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in any other way than the way that the members of the approved societies decide? If you believe it should be used in the way laid down in the previous Clause, why not, after the words:
as Parliament may hereafter determine,
provided always that it shall be used as shall be determined by the persons concerned"?
§ If you are not going to give it for the benefit of the people who have subscribed it, at least say, "We intend to use it as we have used the Road Fund when we raided it, and other funds which we have raided from time to time."
§ Question put, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 185; Noes.111.2215
|Division No. 31.]||AYES.||[10.45 p.m.|
|Acland-Troyte, Lt.-Col. G. J.||Davies, Major Sir G. F. (Yeovil)||Harvey, T. E.|
|Albery, Sir Irving||Denman, Hon. R. D.||Haslam, Henry (Horncastle)|
|Allen, Lt.-Col. Sir W. J. (Armagh)||Denville, Alfred||Hely-Hutchinson, M. R.|
|Anderson, Rt. Hn. Sir J. (Sc'h Univ's)||Dodd, J. S.||Hepburn, P. G. T. Buchan-|
|Aske, Sir R. W.||Doland, G. F||Higgs, W. F.|
|Baldwin-Webb, Col. J.||Drewe, C.||Holmes, J. S.|
|Balfour, Capt. H. H. (Isle of Thanet)||Duckworth, W. R. (Moss Side)||Horabin, T. L.|
|Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.||Duncan, J. A. L. (Kensington, N.)||Horsbrugh, Florence|
|Beauchamp, Sir B. C.||Dunglass, Lord||Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hack., N.)|
|Beechman, N. A.||Eckersley, P. T.||Hudson, Rt. Hon. R. S. (Southport)|
|Bennett, Sir E. N.||Edmondson, Major Sir J.||Hume, Sir G. H.|
|Bernays, R. H.||Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E.||Jarvis, Sir J. J.|
|Blair, Sir R.||Elliston, Capt. G. S.||Jennings, R.|
|Boles, Lt.-Col. D. C.||Emrys-Evans, P. V.||Kerr, Sir John Graham (Sco'sh Univs.)|
|Bossom, A. C.||Entwistle, Sir C. F.||Knox, Major-General Sir A. W. F.|
|Boulton, W. W.||Etherton, Ralph||Lamb, Sir J. Q.|
|Briscoe, Capt. R. G.||Evans, D. O. (Cardigan)||Leech, Sir J. W.|
|Broadbridge, Sir G. T.||Everard, Sir William Lindsay||Levy, T.|
|Brooke, H. (Lewisham, W.)||Fildes, Sir H.||Lindsay, K. M.|
|Brown, Rt. Hon. E. (Leith)||Foot, D. M.||Lipson, D. L.|
|Burghley, Lord||Fremantle Sir F. E||Llewellin, Colonel J. J.|
|Burgin, Rt. Hon. E. L.||Fyfe, D. P. M.||Loftus, P. C.|
|Butcher, H. W.||George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesey)||Lucas, Major Sir J. M.|
|Campbell, Sir E. T.||Gibson, Sir C. G. (Pudsey and Otley)||MacAndrew, Colonel Sir C. G.|
|Cary, R. A.||Gledhill, G.||McCorquodale, M. S.|
|Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)||Goldie, N. B.||MacDonald, Rt. Hon. M. (Ross)|
|Channon, H.||Gower, Sir R. V.||MacDonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)|
|Chapman. A. (Rutherglen)||Graham, Captain A. C. (Wirral)||McKie, J. H.|
|Christie, J. A.||Greene, W. P. C. (Worcester)||Magnay, T.|
|Cobb, Captain E. C. (Preston)||Gretton, Col. Rt. Hon. J.||Maitland, Sir Adam|
|Colfox, Major Sir W. P.||Gridley, Sir A. B.||Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R.|
|Colman, N. C. D.||Griffith, F. Kingsley (M'ddl'sbro, W.)||Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.|
|Colville, Rt. Hon. John||Grigg, Sir E. W. M||Mitchell, Col. H. (Brentfd & Chisw'k)|
|Cooke, J. D. (Hammersmith, S.)||Grimston, R. V.||Moore-Brabazon, Lt.-Col. J. T. C.|
|Courtauld, Major J. S.||Guest, Maj. Hon. O. (C'mb'rw'll, N.W.)||Morgan, R. H. (Worcester, Stourbridge)|
|Courthope, Col. Rt. Hon. Sir G. L.||Hacking, Rt. Hon. Sir D. H.||Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)|
|Croft, Brig.-Gen. Sir H. Page||Hambro, A. V.||Morrison, Rt. Hon. W. S. (Cirencester)|
|Crooke, Sir J. Smedley||Hammersley, S. S.||Munro, P.|
|Crookshank, Capt. Rt. Hon H. F. C.||Hannon, Sir P. J. H.||Nall, Sir J.|
|Cruddas, Col. B.||Harbord, Sir A.||Neven-Spence, Major B. H. H.|
|Culverwell, C. T.||Harland, H. P.||O'Connor, Sir Terence J.|
|Davidson, Viscountess||Harris, Sir P. A.||O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh|
|Owen, Major G.||Schuster, Sir G. E.||Tree, A. R. L. F.|
|Pickthorn, K. W. M.||Selley, H. R.||Tryon, Major Rt. Hon. G. C.|
|Ponsonby, Col. C. E.||Shakespeare, G. H.||Tufnell, Lieut.-Commander R. L.|
|Procter, Major H. A.||Shaw, Major P. S. (Wavertree)||Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Euan|
|Pym, L. R.||Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)||Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)|
|Radford, E. A.||Shepperson, Sir E. W.||Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)|
|Ramsbotham, Rt. Hon. H.||Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U. B'lf'st)||Warrender, Sir V.|
|Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)||Smiles, Lieut.-Colonel Sir W. D.||Waterhouse, Captain C.|
|Reid, J. S. C. (Hillhead)||Somervell, Rt. Hon. Sir Donald||Wayland, Sir W. A|
|Rickards, G. W. (Skipton)||Somerville, Sir A. A. (Windser)||Wells, Sir Sydney|
|Roberts, W. (Cumberland, N.)||Southby, Commander Sir A. R. J.||White, Sir Dymoke (Fareham)|
|Robertson, D.||Spens. W. P.||Wickham, Lt.-Col. E. T. R.|
|Robinson, J. R. (Blackpool)||Stewart, J. Henderson (Fife, E.)||Williams, C. (Torquay)|
|Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)||Storey, S.||Williams, Sir H. G. (Croydon, S.)|
|Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.||Strauss. H. G. (Norwich)||Wragg, H.|
|Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A.||Strickland, Captain W. F.||Wright, Wing-Commander J. A. C.|
|Russell, Sir Alexander||Sueter, Rear-Admiral Sir M. F.||Young, A. S. L. (Partick)|
|Salter, Sir J. Arthur (Oxford U.)||Taylor, Vice-Adm. E. A. (Padd., S.)|
|Samuel, M. R. A.||Thomas, J. P. L||TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—|
|Sandeman, Sir N. S.||Thomson, Sir J. D W.||Mr. James Stuart and Lient.-Colonel Kerr.|
|Sanderson, Sir F. B.||Touche,. G.C.|
|Adams, D. (Consett)||Hall, W. G. (Colne Valley)||Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.|
|Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)||Hayday, A.||Price, M. P.|
|Adamson, Jennie L. (Dartford)||Henderson, J. (Ardwick)||Pritt, D. N.|
|Adamson, W. M.||Henderson, T. (Tradeston)||Quibell. D. J. K.|
|Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (H'lsbr.)||Hicks, E. G.||Richards, R. (Wrexham)|
|Ammon, C. G.||Hills, A. (Pontefratt)||Ridley, G.|
|Anderson, F. (Whitehaven)||Hollins, A. (Hanley)||Riley, B.|
|Attlee, Rt. Hon. C. R.||Hollins, J. H. (Silvertown)||Ritson, J.|
|Banfield, J. W.||Isaacs, G. A.||Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)|
|Barnes, A. J.||Jackson, W. F.||Sexton. T. M.|
|Barr, J.||Jenkins, A. (Pontypool)||Shinwell, E.|
|Batey, J.||Jenkins, Sir W. (Neath)||Silkin, L.|
|Beaumont, H. (Batley)||John, W.||Silverman, S. S.|
|Bevan, A.||Jones, A. C. (Shipley)||Sloan, A.|
|Buchanan, G.||Jowitt, Rt. Hon. Sir W. A.||Smith, Ben (Rotherhithe)|
|Burke, W. A.||Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.||Smith, E. (Stoke)|
|Cape, T.||Lathan, G.||Smith, T. (Normanton)|
|Charleton, H. C.||Leach, W.||Sorensen, R. W.|
|Chater, D.||Leonard, W.||Stephen, C.|
|Cluse, W. S.||Leslie, J. R.||Stewart, W. J. (H'ghtn-le-Sp'ng)|
|Cocks, F. S.||Lunn, W.||Summerskill, Dr. Edith|
|Collindridge, F.||Macdonald, G. (Ince)||Thurtle, E.|
|Daggar, G.||McEntee, V. La T.||Tinker, J. J.|
|Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)||McGhee, H. G.||Tomlinson, G.|
|Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton)||Maclean, N.||Walkden, A. G.|
|Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)||Marshall, F.||Watkins, F. C.|
|Dobbie, W.||Messer, F.||Watson, W. McL.|
|Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)||Milner, Major J.||Welsh, J. C.|
|Ede, J. C.||Morgan, J. (York, W.R., Doncaster)||Whiteley, W. (Blaydon)|
|Edwards, Sir C. (Bedwellty)||Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S)||Williams, E. J. (Ogmore)|
|Edwards, N. (Caerphilly)||Mort, D. L.||Williams, T. (Don Valley)|
|Gardner, B. W.||Naylor, T. E.||Windsor, W. (Hull, C)|
|Gibson, R. (Greenock)||Noel-Baker, P. J.||Woodburn, A.|
|Graham, D. M. (Hamilton)||Oliver, G. H.||Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)|
|Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A.||Paling, W.||Young, Sir R. (Newton)|
|Griffiths, J. (Llanelly)||Parker, J.|
|Hall, G. H. (Aberdare)||Parkinson, J. A.||TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—|
|Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)||Pearson, A.||Mr. Mathers and Mr. R. J. Taylor.|
§ Clauses 5, 6 and 7 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
§ Ordered, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—[Captain Margesson.]
§ Committee report Progress; to sit again To-morrow.2216
§ The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.
§ Resolved, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Mr. James Stuart.]
§ Adjourned accordingly at Two Minutes before Eleven o'Clock.