LIABILITIES (WAR-TIME ADJUSTMENT) [MONEY]. (Hansard, 24 April 1941)

§ Mr. Garro Jones

There is one point which has not been mentioned in the course of the Second Reading Debate, which is a matter of some importance and which is relevant to the Financial Resolution. Various appeals were made, not only from one side of the House, that the Government should give some assistance to persons badly affected by the war. To attempt to advance the appeal on the Financial Resolution would, of course, be out of Order. What I wish to say is this: It frequently happens that when a point of law is involved and is in serious dispute in cases of this kind, a poor debtor is put to enormous expense merely in order that the point of law should be decided by the successive courts of first instance and the Court of Appeal. I would like to know, when appeals are made against these liabilities adjustment schemes, whether the respondent will be the debtor or whether he will be the liabilities adjustment officer. If he is to be the liabilities adjustment officer, is it possible that in cases of this kind the Government would consider at least that the costs should be met out of the Exchequer? We must remember that we are dealing in the main with small people who have been seriously affected by the war. In the great majority of cases their estates will certainly not consist of 321 more than £200 or £300; putting it at the maximum, I will go up to £1,000 to cover the cases which the hon. Member for Bal-ham and Tooting (Mr. Doland) has in mind. If these debtors are to be made respondents on points of law raised under this Bill, not only the nest-egg which a man has accumulated in the form of payment for the sale of his stock, but a great deal of other money as well, will be dissipated. I do not wish to press the point now. No doubt, it has occurred to my right hon. and learned Friend, but I would ask him to consider between now and the appropriate stage whether something can be done to meet the costs out of the Exchequer.

§ The Attorney-General

Certainly the question of costs is an important one. With regard to the liabilities adjustment officer, our intention is that his services in his advisory and negotiating capacity should be entirely free. If he is given the duty, as he may be, of administering a scheme of some complexity as many of them may be, there may be considerable amounts of money involved. There is power to charge fees, and the idea is to charge fees which would cover the necessary disbursements, but there is also power to remit. With regard to the possibility of the liabilities adjustment officer being the respondent, I have not considered what the procedure would be. My hon. Friend said that he did not press the matter at the moment, but I will take 322 note of it and will look into it. We do agree that costs should be kept down as much as possible. We hope that the powers of the court in the background will in most cases lead to the matter being settled without resort to the court, but I will certainly see whether one can think of anything which could be done in this matter if proceedings have to be taken in court.