NATIONAL INSURANCE (INDUSTRIAL INJURIES) BILL (Hansard, 25 July 1946)

§ Mr. Osbert Peake (Leeds, North)

I have only one or two observations to make on the Motion now before the House. The first is that supporters of the Government must be duly grateful that there is still a second Chamber which can produce such useful Amendments as those upon the Order Paper. The second observation I would make is that my only possible reason for opposing this Motion would be that the Lords Amendments do not contain certain matters which we were promised by Government spokesmen that they would contain.

Speaking on nth February last, the Lord Privy Seal said: What I can say is that, so far as the Industrial Injuries Bill is concerned, any Amendments which are necessary"— he was speaking of any Amendments that were necessary to implement the recommendations of the Monckton Committee on alternative remedies— will be introduced in another place, and, if the House agrees to dissent, it can do so." —[OFFICIAL REPORT, Monday, nth February, 1946; Vol. 419, c. 95.] 346 This question of the Monckton Committee's Report is, of course, fundamental to the carrying into effect of the Industrial Injuries Bill. It is recognised that the question of alternative remedies must be dealt with before the appointed day, and we were given to understand by Government spokesmen that the Amendments necessary to implement the recommendations of the Monckton Committee would be introduced into this Bill in another place. I ventured to take the view that the matter was one of such importance that the House of Commons ought to be given the first opportunity of dealing with it, and that such an important matter should not be raised in another place. I am glad to see that the Government have accepted my suggestion upon this point.

Without in any way trespassing on the merits of the Report of the Monckton Committee, I would only say that it obviously raises questions of immense difficulties and of immense importance, such as are likely to give rise to very serious controversy in this House. Therefore, I congratulate the Government on not carrying out their undertaking that the necessary Amendments would be introduced into the Industrial Injuries Bill in another place.