§ Mr. SummersI beg to move, in page 9, line 25, after "writing," to insert:
or orally if the commission so decides.Perhaps it would be convenient for the Committee if the next Amendment stand-in my name—in page 9, line 27, after "thereof," to insert:and may if it thinks fit cause local inquiry to be made.—could be considered along with this one, as the two Amendments really hang together.
§ The Deputy-ChairmanI was not proposing to select the following Amendment, because I thought it was covered by the first one. If the Committee agree, there will be no objection to discussing the two together.
§ Mr. SummersThese Amendments desire to give greater variety of treatment and action by the commission, so that if it is desired to have representations made orally, or by means of local inquiry, it would be within their province so to arrange matters that every opportunity should be given for views to be heard which would be relevant to the case.
§ Captain Duncan (Kensington, North)These commissions of inquiry would probably have to deal with cases on a national basis, but there may be cases in which local conditions may be different. These two points which my hon. Friend has put forward cover both the local conditions and the question that there should be a proper hearing, with oral evidence as well as evidence in writing. Both points seem to be eminently reasonable, and I hope the right hon. Gentleman the Minister, even if he cannot agree with the actual wording of the Amendments, will allow the idea to be put into practice.
§ Mr. BevinWith regard to the first Amendment, it seeks to allow the commission to invite objections not in writing. That would enable anybody to come before the commission without there being any case in writing before them. That I could not accept. That point was gone into very fully on the Catering Wages Bill, and the House has always turned down such a course. If somebody wants to come before a commission to object, then, what they are objecting to, ought to be put in writing in the first place. With regard to the second Amendment, the point it wishes to make is already covered in the Bill, because it is open to the commission, when they examine cases in writing, to say whether or not they will make local enquiries. In the actual Clause it is left to the commission to determine. A commission of inquiry would have power to hear oral evidence in support of an objection that had been submitted in writing. That is quite clear in the Clause as it stands.
§ Mr. SummersMay I ask for a little elucidation? The Sub-section with which 1665 we are dealing appears to me to affect considerations prior to the recommendations of the commission. The Minister, as I understood him, referred to objections to decisions that a commission has already reached, whereas this Sub-section precedes the formation of conclusions, and it is with the opportunity of giving oral evidence, or holding a local inquiry, before the recommendations are framed, and not with objections afterwards, that I, personally, am concerned.
§ Mr. BevinI think the case is quite clear. Sub-section (2) says:
… the commission shall make all such investigations as appear to it to be necessary and shall publish in the prescribed manner a notice stating the questions which it is its duty to consider by virtue of the reference and further stating that it will consider representations with respect thereto made to it in writing within such period as may be specified in the notice, not being less than forty days from the date of publication thereof; and it shall consider any representations made to it within that period and then make such further inquiries as it considers necessary.First, it has to consider written applications. Then it has to consider representations, and one of the representations will be, I assume, that a man wants to be heard orally. It will consider all that, after which it will make any further investigation that is absolutely necessary. It is our intention to allow that to operate.
§ Captain DuncanWill my right hon. Friend have another look at this? He has read out Sub-section (2), but there is nothing in it which gives power to a man to be heard orally. If there could be something in writing to that effect, I think it would be a protection to possible objectors.
§ Mr. BevinI will certainly look at it, although I feel convinced that the point is already covered.
§ Mr. SummersAs I have the Minister's assurance that he will look at the matter to make sure that the point is covered, I beg to ask leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.