§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
§ Mr. HoggOn a point of Order. I do not want to initiate a Debate on this question, but certain words said by the hon. Member for Rugby (Mr. W. J. Brown) on a point of Order have led me to enter a caveat. The Amendment which is down in the names of the hon. Member and myself is designed to cover the case of people temporarily serving in the Armed Forces of the Crown. Whether or not we have drawn it cleverly 374 enough to cover them, in view of Clause 5, I do not know. Neither the hon. Member nor myself interfered with Clause 5 in our proposed Amendment, but should we be successful in carrying our point on Clause 5 we should expect the Government to treat our arguments as designed to protect equally with the temporary civil servant those who are temporarily serving with the Armed Forces of the Crown.
§ Mr. Benson (Chesterfield)As the Amendment in the name of the hon. Gentleman definitely and completely excludes the Armed Forces—
§ Mr. BensonOh, yes; at any rate it excludes officers in the Armed Forces. Let me quote his Amendment. He defines Crown employment as all officers who are
treated as falling within Rule 11 of the Rules applicable to Schedule E.Officers of the Armed Forces are not dealt with under Rule 11 but under Rule 6. Therefore the hon. Member completely excludes, by definition, all the officers of the Armed Forces. Whether he excludes privates and ratings I do not know, because—
The Deputy-ChairmanI am very sorry to interrupt the hon. Member, but I must point out that we have not got on to that Amendment yet.
§ Mr. BensonI was really on a point of Order, Mr. Williams. The question is whether we must deal with the Armed Forces on Clause 5, or whether we shall be able to deal with them on Clause 6, or on the substitute proposed new Clause of the hon. Member. He claims, in his point of Order that he has drawn his Amendment to include the Armed Forces, but it is not so. He has drawn it to exclude the Armed Forces. I want to raise the position of the Armed Forces, but I am not clear whether I can to do it on the question "That the Clause stand part of the Bill," on Clause 6, or whether on the new Clause which excludes the Armed Forces or, further, whether it has to be done on Clause 5.
The Deputy-ChairmanThey are, of course, in Clause 5. I think we had better leave the new Clause out of consideration for a minute or two.
§ Sir J. AndersonPerhaps it would be convenient if on this point of Order, I merely say that officers are, in fact, in Rule 11 as well as in Rule 6. I do not think there is any difficulty. Anyhow, it can be got over, if there should be.
§ Mr. BensonWill the Chancellor take these officers as under Rule 11?
§ Sir J. AndersonYes.
§ Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.