HC Deb 04 August 1947 vol 441 cc1108-29
Lords Amendment

In page 12, line 6, at end, insert: Provided that no direction shall be given either while a supervision order is in force or otherwise which shall alter the character of a holding from that which existed when the contract or tenancy agreement was made.

The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture (Mr. Collick)

I beg to move, "That this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

I would direct the attention of hon. Members particularly to the words of this Amendment. The effect is clearly to provide that no direction for the provision.

improvement, maintenance or repair of fixed equipment should be given to an owner or farmer, whether or not they are under supervision, which should change the character of the holding from what it was when the original tenancy agreement was made. We find ourselves quite unable to accept this Amendment. We must have regard to the fact that there are farms where it may well be necessary for directions to be given for the provision or the maintenance or repair of fixed equipment which may have the effect of changing the character of the holding. We are all familar, I am sure, with cases of grassland farms that were virtually ranched before the war, where the changing circumstances of agriculture have determined that they must no longer be just grass farms, but where it has been desirable to see that there is a certain amount of arable farming there. It may well happen that, where those circumstances arise and some of that farmland is turned into arable farm land, it may be necessary for the Minister to give a direction for some provision of fixed equipment or the like. Therefore, we say it would be quite wrong for the House to accept this Amendment, which would make any such direction as that impossible because it would have the effect of changing the character of the holding.

We take the view that the persons who will decide whether or not a direction should be so given will be the county agricultural executive committee. Those county committees are made up of responsible agriculturists, and we feel quite certain, and the House can feel quite assured, that no responsible county agricultural executive committee will give any direction to change the character of the holding unless in their collective wisdom there is some real reason for doing so. It is just because we prefer to put our faith, rightly, in those committees in a matter of this kind that we feel that it would be wrong to accept the Amendment.

I ask the House to realise what this Amendment would mean in practice. It would mean, in effect, that once a tenancy has been created—and in the nature of the case there are many tenancies which run for a considerable number of years—circumstances may arise where it would be quite impossible to adopt any of the changing practices of agriculture, ley farming and all the rest of it, which might well mean a direction to make some provision of capital equipment or the like. The one accepted thing about agriculture, irrespective of party viewpoint, is the fact that agriculture is a changing science and that the changing years have been changing agriculture practices. We feel it would be quite wrong in the circumstances to allow ourselves to be tied by this Amendment which would mean that, as agriculture changes, once the tenancy has been created, however long it ran, we would be debarred from giving a direction to change the character of the holding. For those reasons I ask the House not to accept the Amendment which comes from another place.

Major Sir Thomas Dugdale (Richmond)

I am sorry that the Government are moved to reject this Amendment which comes from another place, and I am particularly sorry because it is the first occasion for a long time that we have had the pleasure of hearing the Parliamentary Secretary back in his place again resuming his discussion of agricultural matters. Really this Amendment deals with a question of principle, and it is on a question of principle that I shall ask my hon. Friends on this side to divide the House. The Parliamentary Secretary based his argument in rejecting this Amendment on the county agricultural committees. We take the contrary view, and believe that any change in the tenancy agreements which might have been made in this regard should be made by agreement between the landlord and the tenant. We believe that the landlord and the tenant having freely entered into a "contract binding on both parties, that contract should remain. Every holding has certain characteristics, and we can assume that those characteristics were taken into account when the original tenancy was created. It is altogether wrong that some outside body, even the county agricultural committee, should be able to import into the tenancy agreement fresh obligations on the landlord. We agree that on the short-term view, there are provisions in the Bill for going to arbitration on this subject, but we are concerned with the long-term agreement.

When there is a change of tenancy, the character of the whole holding may have been altered by direction under this Clause. Is it to be the landlord's duty possibly to reconvert the holding at his own expense 10 the original kind of farming according to the original tenancy, although he may have been directed to do things which have not been successful? It is on the long-term view that hon. Members on this side of the House are worried. All hon. Members are agreed that farming is most diverse in activity. Practically every holding is different in regard to the treatment it requires for maximum production. It may be that the fashion today is for mixed farming and to go in for pig production and pig breeding. That may be because of the shortage of fats at present, and the tenant who asks that his fixed equipment shall be transformed into suitable accommodation for pig breeding, will have the support of the county agricultural committee, and of the Minister. He may start on his pig breeding and then find there is no suitable bacon factory near his home, or he does not make a success of that side of the industry. All he has to do is to give a year's notice to quit, and at the end of the year the holding comes back into the hands of the landlord. It may be that before he can get another tenant to take on the holding the landlord will have to reconvert the buildings to that type of farming to which it had been accustomed. I could refer to the difficulties which arise in transferring from beef to milk, or from milk to beef, all of which costs money.

10.0 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary based his case for refusing the Amendment on the wisdom of the county executive committees, whereas we on this side of the House, whilst agreeing that the county executive committees might be, and we hope will be, of great assistance to the industry under the operation of the Bill, think very profoundly that the final responsibility should be with the owner of the property in this particular instance. In this, we have a definite division of opinion between the two sides of the House. We cannot get away from it it goes far beyond this Amendment, it goes far beyond the considerations in this Bill. I do not intend to argue the pros and cons of nationalisation, but the question comes within this Amendment—the question of Government control or free enterprise. We believe that under free enterprise the man who has the financial responsibility to meet is the right person to take the responsibility in this case. For that reason we feel we must go into the Division Lobby in opposition to the Government on this matter. This is a question of the Government interfering in a contract, which has been readily accepted, between the landlord and the tenant, and saying that they are justified in so doing. We do not believe they are justified in so doing, and for that reason, we oppose the Government.

Mr. Hurd (Newbury)

I should like to add a word to what my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Richmond (Sir T. Dugdale) has said, because, while we on this side of the House fully recognise the need for directions in certain cases to require good farming and good estate management, we feel that the direction for the proper use of the farm or estate should concern its proper use as it is laid out, partly by nature and partly by man in the past—the farm as it stands. My hon. and gallant Friend gave one instance of what might happen, an instance of a farmer getting round the county committee and persuading them to allow a pretty big expenditure probably on pig fattening plant. Today it might be for grain growing, because there are large parts of the country where it might be argued that if the land is to be efficiently farmed, there must be proper grain-drying plant, which would involve considerable expenditure running into several thousands of pounds. Yet there is no certainty that what is deemed necessary now for the efficient economical farming of that particular land will be deemed necessary in two, three or five years' time. I would remind the Minister of what he said in Cheshire on Saturday—that we wanted to get away from cereals, potato and sugar beet and concentrate on livestock.

Let us assume that an estate owner has been required to finance this improvement, and then there is a change in national policy, which might be highly desirable; he is left to "carry the baby." That farm will not be worth as much as it would be if it could be readily converted to livestock farming under some change of Government policy. It is true that the Minister would not make this direction without consulting the county agricultural committee, and if those committees were to be masters in their own house, that would be all right. In the Bill, however, county committees are the agents of the Minister, and the tendency is to get more and more direction from the centre. Although there is this provision to say that nothing shall be done, or that it is understood that nothing shall be done, without the recommendation of the county committee, that may mean, in point of fact, some admirable official sitting in Whitehall deciding that it is the proper thing for grain drying plant to be provided. The local committee being the Minister's agents, if they do not do what he says is the proper thing, they will lose their jobs, for what that might be worth.

Mr. Alpass (Thornbury)

Is it not clear in the Bill that if that expenditure exceeds the rent, the landlord will have the right of appeal to a tribunal?

Mr. Hurd

Yes, there is that provision, but rents are likely to be moving upwards. Therefore, the limit under this Clause may move upwards, and may be quite considerable. We on this side of the House feel that if the necessary re-equipment cannot be done economically without changing the whole character of the farm, and the owner or the farmer under direction has failed to show the necessary improvement without altering the character of the farm, he should be dispossessed—there is ample power in the Bill—but that he should not be forced, against his own judgment, to undertake a quite considerable expenditure. If the Minister wants to have a gamble, having taken over a farm, by installing grain drying or pig fattening plant, well and good, but he should not have power to require a private owner to speculate his money in that way. I wholly support what my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Richmond has said.

Mr. Gerald Williams (Tonbridge)

I would like to add a few remarks about the case of a tenant who wanted to go in for pig farming in a big way. It might well be, as has been said, that the agricultural executive committee might be very keen to have fats at that time. On the other hand, the Minister of Food might be very keen to have bacon because of the bad bargains which he might have made with other countries. Therefore, the agricultural executive committee will feel inclined to say that the landlord should produce piggeries for his tenant. In a short time the tenant might find that he was on a bad wicket and the landlord would be left with his piggeries and would have to bear the expense. That decision would have been taken by an agricultural executive committee which might well have been prejudiced by the Ministry of Food or the Ministry of Agriculture. It is because of that prejudiced opinion that we feel that the landlord's consent should be given in every case before these directions are brought about. If a farm is known to be a certain kind of farm, it should be allowed to remain for that purpose. Fashion changes very quickly, and Ministers may also change very quickly. One Minister might be a pig man, another might be a milk man, and the landlord would have to work accordingly.

This power was never considered necessary during the vital war years but, for some reason, it was considered necessary to include it in this Bill. In another case, we might get a tenant who was very keen on breeding horses, perhaps Suffolk Punches. The Chancellor of the Exchequer might think that this was a very fine dollar saving device—to breed horses and to save the import of American tractors. He would pass his opinion to the agricultural executive committee, and again they would be prejudiced in the decisions they had to make. I know that the Minister will say that the committees will be reasonable in all cases and will err on the side of conservatism, but so long as they may be prejudiced by the opinion of a Minister, we are taking a very grave risk. In the long run, a landlord may well think that if there were plenty of feedingstuffs in the country we could produce the milk we require from only three-quarters of the number of cows we have at present. He might think that that happy time is coming very shortly and, therefore, if there is to be a surplus, it is no use him turning his farm over to milk production. The agricultural executive committee might not hold such a long view. They might take a very short view, and the landlord might be put into a difficult position.

This procedure may cause a great deal of ill feeling towards the Minister. If the landlord converts his buildings of his own free will, and finds he has made a mistake, then it is his own fault and he blames himself for his folly. But if he converts his buildings at the direction of a Minister, he will hold a never-ceasing dislike and hatred of that Minister, and that is a thing which we want to avoid in the future. My final point is that, at the present time, anyhow, there is a great shortage of materials, and the landlord, in his wisdom, by having to give his consent to an improvement, may well tell the Minister that the labour and supplies of materials were not available. I submit that my hon. Friends, in asking for the landlord's consent, are putting forward a suggestion which will not only be wise but advantageous to all concerned.

Mr. Joynson-Hicks (Chichester)

I do not think it has come as any surprise to the Minister that we on this side of the House, are supporting my hon. and gallant Friend in opposing this Motion. In the Committee stage of this Bill, we expressed considerable apprehension about the scope of the power which the Minister seeks to take in this regard. We endeavoured to reduce it in a very much wider way than is done by this Amendment, but, if we cannot get the whole of what we want, I think we shall, at least, be glad to take as little as is recommended by this Amendment from another place. I very much hope that the arguments which have already been adduced are sufficient in support of the Amendment. It is all very well for the Parliamentary Secretary to say that he relies upon the wisdom of the county committees. I agree with him as to their wisdom, but no member of a county committee would claim to be a prophet as opposed to being a farmer.

It may well be that a farmer, whether he be an owner-occupier, a landlord or a tenant farmer, will think, as the county committee members who are his colleagues may also think, that the future of the industry is set in milk production, and, when the question arises, they may well say that it is desirable that a particular farm should turn over to milk production and that the landlord should incur the expense which is necessary nowadays for first-class milk production. Who are they, any more than the hon. Gentlemen or ourselves, to say that milk production will be the profitable enterprise for this country for four, five or 10 years to come? The landlord is not going to be able to recover, in 10 years through his rent, his expenditure on the expensive outlay required for turning over a farm to milk production. I therefore suggest that the Parliamentary Secretary should take this point into consideration.

We all know that it is perfectly practicable, from the physical aspect, for Denmark, which has a surplus of milk, to send milk to this country, to be retailed in London within a shorter space of time than it can be retailed there after having been produced in this country. That is perfectly feasible and possible at the present time, but, equally, at the present time, it is not being done. It is equally certain that producers in this country believe that they are safe in their milk market, and, therefore, the county committee may well say, in their wisdom, as the hon. Gentleman has suggested, that it would be a good thing for the tenant farmer to have milk production buildings put up on his farm, and for the landlord to incur the expense. But, if the Government change their mind, and I believe I am right in saying that the present Government have changed their mind from time to time on different matters, and milk is imported into this country from Denmark, the whole policy of agricultural production may be changed overnight. In that case, there would immediately be a loss to the landlord who had erected those buildings, and it would be an irrecoverable loss. The tenant, if he so wishes, may give notice to terminate the tenancy in a year's time, and the landlord would then be unable to re-let the farm at what may be an economic rent. That rent may not be based at all on the value of the buildings which were erected for milk production purposes, because they are no longer required for those purposes. I hope, therefore, that the hon. Gentleman will see the reason for giving this particular right.

10.15 p.m.

It is no argument whatever to suggest that the county agriculture committees would wish to change the character of the farm, particularly if it is already under supervision. If they have put a farmer under supervision on account of what they consider to be his failure to farm the land properly as an arable farm, they will only be able to supervise him from that point of view. It is no use thinking that they can supervise him from the point of view of a pastoral farmer, and that they can convert the whole of the farm to pastoral land. The same is true conversely; if they have put a man under supervision as a pastoral farmer, it is no use their saying, while he is under supervision, that he would do better if the land were converted into an arable farm, because the man is not qualified to farm in that way. Therefore, that argument falls to the ground. I hope, therefore, that, as there is no reason whatever for objecting to this provision, and as I am quite sure it is one which the county agriculture committees would themselves welcome, the hon. Gentleman will think again, and will not seek to disagree with this Amendment.

Mr. York (Ripon)

There are practical objections to the Minister's Motion, which have been put before him. Although my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Richmond (Sir T. Dugdale) said that there were fundamental differences between the two sides of the House, I do not think that the Minister really appreciated what those differences mean. We on this side of the House take a very strong view as to the meaning of a contract of tenancy, and we take it on one ground—that these contracts are entered into willingly between the two parties. From the point of view of the owner of the land, they are based upon the long-term interests, not of the owner, but of the land. The owner's job is to protect the long-term interests of the land, which, in turn, protect the interests which the nation may have in the production from that land. The Parliamentary Secretary cited in aid the fact that the county agricultural committees were going to deal with these particular problems. That, in the majority of cases, will be all right, but it is just because we do not believe that every county agricultural committee is going to be perfect that we think a safeguard of the land, and of the general economics of the property, is necessary.

In Yorkshire, no doubt, the doughty Yorkshiremen will see that their committee is under the control of Yorkshire-men, and not under the control of the Minister's servants; but that will not be the case in other parts of the country. There have been cases to my own knowledge where, during the war, committees were run by the officials.

Mr. Alpass

Who appointed them?

Mr. York

Surely, that is beside the point. Whether the appointment was made by a Conservative or a Socialist Minister of Agriculture, does not vitiate my argument in the least. The fact remains, whoever appointed any committee which failed in what I conceive to be its duty, it failed because the officials were allowed to get in charge of the committee. Surely no Minister of Agriculture will be disgusted if he finds that his orders are so implicitly carried out in a committee area. But that is leading me from my main argument. We know that at different times various types of husbandry are of particular importance in the eyes of officialdom, and we know that on those occasions a tenant farmer can make out a very good case for a particular line of business being essential to a farm at that time. I myself have had some unfortunate experiences in that regard, and although I will not now go into them, I may say that there are very plausible farmers who are really not such good businessmen as they might appear, few though they may be. But it is a fact that a very plausible case might be made out for one of the types of production, or alteration, or improvement, mentioned by some of my hon. Friends, which, at that moment, might appear to the committee to be a reasonable proposition, but which would certainly alter the character of the holding. We say categorically that it is wrong that a committee should have the power so to alter the character of a holding in that respect.

Each district within the area of a committee varies considerably. In my own county—in the West Riding, at any rate—the variety in districts is enormous, as the Minister knows very well, and it may well be that the representative on the committee from that particular area which happens to be under review in this connection may disagree with the main committee, but may be in a minority of one. In that case, obviously the majority opinion wins the day, and the local knowledge of the representative from the area under review will be set aside. The Minister may say, "That is all right; the committee have decided by a majority that this is the right decision."But the one man who could really give the most intimate appreciation of the situation is the one man who has disagreed with the committee's main decision. That, surely, should not be so.

For my last point, I would refer to the landlord's responsibilities If the Government intend, as they obviously do, to place the management and the responsibility of management upon the shoulders of the landowner, then it is only right and fair to the owner that that responsibility should be on his shoulders and not on the shoulders of the committee. If these various powers are taken by the committee to alter the character of a holding, regardless of whether that holding or estate is under supervision or not, then the responsibility is taken away from the landowner, and that, surely, must weaken the whole principle of placing the landowners' responsibility squarely on his shoulders. As my hon. Friend the Member for Newbury (Mr. Hurd) said, if the landowner is failing in his responsibilities, under another part of the Bill he can be dispossessed. That is the right solution, but to use directions of this nature, whether that owner is acknowledged a good one or whether he is acknowledged a bad one, is, in my contention, a thoroughly wrong way of doing what the Minister sets out himself to do—to see that the land is properly managed. I consider that the Minister, in resisting this Amendment, is, in fact, weakening the responsibilities of one of the partners in the industry, and for that reason I shall oppose the rejection of this Amendment.

Mr. T. Williams

Not to be charged with discourtesy, I thought I might, in just one or two moments, reply to the statements which have been made. Two things have emerged from this Debate The first is a very clear one—that there is a distinct cleavage of opinion between the two sides of the House on this matter Hon Members opposite will retain their views to the bitter end. I suspect that my hon Friends will do ditto. The other thing which emerged was, the length to which hon. Members stretched their imaginations to try to make out a case against disagreement with this Amendment. The hon. Member for Newbury (Mr. Hurd) suggested that the tendency these days was not to leave county executive committees to do the job as practical persons associated with the industry—landowners, farmers and and workers, and some professionals—but that the tendency is to move towards the centre. Surely, the hon. Member for Newbury must know that the very opposite is the case. Throughout the war the Minister appointed every member of the county executive committees without consulting anybody. Under the terms of the Bill the Minister must appoint two members from the panel of the Central Landowners' Association, three members from the panel of the National Farmers' Union, and two members from the panel of the Agricultural Workers' Unions. Therefore, there is no centralisation under this Bill, such as there was during the course of the war. So why the hon. Member should make that point I do not know.

Mr. Hurd

May I tell the right hon. Gentleman why? Because under this Bill, for the first time, the committees are to be denied the opportunity of appointing their own officers. They are to be appointed from Whitehall.

10.30 p.m.

Mr. Williams

The hon. Member is now switching from the argument he used to another argument which has no relation at all to the procedure of the county executives under this Bill. If he had looked at the Order Paper he would have found further down an Amendment, which I propose to accept, which was put down in the name of the Government in another place to make it impossible for the Minister to appoint a paid officer to receive representations from any, either farmers or landowners. Therefore, the hon. Member's argument completely falls, and there can be no basis for it. It is just about as strong as his next argument, in which he introduced the possibility of somebody giving a direction to provide a grain dryer at a cost of about £4,000. Consider a farm of 100 acres with a rent of 25s. per acre—an annual rent, therefore, of £125. If a direction is given to the landowner which is going to cost him one years' income, £125, he can go to an agricultural appeal tribunal—for £125, not for £4,000. That is why I suggest hon. Members have been stretching their imaginations.

Hon. Members referred also to somebody generating enthusiasm for piggeries. How many piggeries can be produced for £125? In all these cases the landowner would have access to the Agricultural Appeal Tribunal and I would ask hon. Members to remember that the tribunal consists of at least one farmer and one landowner and therefore, without detaining the House any longer——

Mr. Frank Byers (Dorset, Northern)

Does the right hon. Gentleman suggest that it is impossible to change the character of a farm for £125?

Mr. Williams

I said nothing of the kind. If it is a wholly grass farm and the tenancy was agreed in the depressed years and it was a farm ranched and not farmed, and direction was given to plough up one field it would be changing the character of the holding. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] Well, hon. Members submit their own arguments, and I am at least entitled to my own view. If it is an all grass farm, and I repeat, one which is ranched and not farmed, it is not good husbandry or good farming, and it is not in the national interest not to serve that direction. To accept this Amendment amounts to depriving county executive committees of power to give a direction in that case. Since hon. Members on both sides of the House have made up their minds on this matter, I hope we can proceed to a Division, since it is the wish that we express our views in that way.

Mr. Charles Williams (Torquay)

I rise to say that I am very disappointed with the Minister's reply. The right hon. gentleman has spoken of the £125 and surely, if one takes the case of a smallish farm the Minister wants to force this clash of opinion for a small thing such' as that. We are told that the definition under this Amendment is that there is a complete altering of a farm if it is only a small matter of ploughing up one field. Surely that is not worth setting up difficulties and having divisions right at the beginning of what may be a comparatively easy evening. The Minister has spoken with the charming manner of a Celt. He has tried to make out that this is a little thing which, in any case, would not be operative. He has said he has no power with the executive committees, and far less power than he used to have, but there are many things by which one can exert great power over the agricultural community today. Perhaps one is proposing to leave that farm under the ownership of a co-operative society, and they have some very bad farms indeed.

Division No. 355.] AYES. [10.39 p.m
Adams, Richard (Balham) Allen, A. C. (Bosworth) Anderson, A. (Motherwell)
Adams, W. T. (Hammersmith. South) Allen, Scholefield (Crewe) Anderson, F. (Whitehaven)
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V Alpass, J. H. Attewell, H. C.

One may be leaving it under such ownership, or one may leave it with a different type of owner——

Mr. Nally rose——

Mr. Williams

If the hon. Gentleman wishes to interrupt I will certainly give way.

Mr. Nally (Bilston)

Do all the points the hon. Gentleman has made about farms apply to the Odiums farms of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Southport (Mr. R. S. Hudson).

Mr. C. Williams

I have not knowledge of the conduct of every farm in this country. I think that is fairly obvious. Up to the present I have only made reference to certain farms, and there has been reference to one lot of landlords. I am interested in another lot of landlords—the co-operative societies. Let me go on from there. I believe quite frankly that the real reason why the Minister wants this is because it does give him a certain power. There is a danger of going around and panicking about, of giving various orders to the committees on the pretext of what they call the interests of the nation. All these things might easily happen at any time. For that reason we realise that the Minister might have accepted this position if he really meant what he said in his speech and if the Under-Secretary meant what he said. We know that is not the reason. The real reason is that they wish to force a hardship in the way of unnecessary capital development upon owners, bit by bit, year by year, and completely alter the whole character of a farm. They want to do it in an under-hand way such as this if it suits them in a particular emergency-For that reason, realising very clearly, as I have said, that we may have the Government in a panic I hope we shall vote against the Motion.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury (Mr. Whiteley)

rose in his place and claimed to move, "That the Question be now put."

Question put, That the Question be now put.

The House divided: Ayes, 262; Noes, 113.

Austin, H. Lewis Haworth, J Ranger, J.
Awbery, S. S. Henderson, A. (Kingswinford) Rankin, J.
Ayles, W. H. Henderson, Joseph (Ardwick) Rees-Williams, D. R.
Ayrton Gould, Mrs. B Herbison, Miss M. Reeves, J.
Balfour, A. Hewitson, Capt. M Reid T. (Swindon)
Barnes, Rt. Hon. A. J Hobson, C. R. Rhodes, H.
Barstow, P. G. Holman, P. Robens, A.
Barton, C. House, G. Robertson, J. J. (Berwick)
Battley, J. R. Hoy, J. Rogers, G. H. R.
Bechervaise, A. E. Hudson, J. H. (Ealing, W.) Ross, William (Kilmarnock)
Belcher, J. W. Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.) Royle, C.
Bing, G. H C. Hughes, H. D. (Wolverhampton, W.) Sargood, R.
Binns, J. Hutchinson, H. L. (Rusholme) Scollan, T.
Blackburn, A. R. Hynd, H. (Hackney, C.) Scott-Elliot, W.
Blenkinsop, A. Hynd, J. B. (Attercliffe) Shackleton, E. A. A.
Blyton, W. R. Irving, W. J. Sharp, Granville
Bowden, Flg.-Offr. H. W. Jay, D. P. T. Shawcross, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (St. Helens)
Bowles, F. G. (Nuneaton) Jeger, G. (Winchester) Shurmer, P.
Braddock, Mrs. E. M. (L'pl, Exch'ge) Jones, D. T. (Hartlepools) Silverman, J. (Erdington)
Braddock, T. (Mitcham) Jones, J. H. (Bolton) Silverman, S. S. (Nelson)
Bramall, E. A. Jones, P. Asterley (Hitchin) Simmons, C. J.
Brook, O. (Halifax) Keenan, W. Skeffington, A. M.
Brown, T. J. (Ince) King, E. M Skeffington-Lodge, T. C.
Buchanan, G. Kinley, J. Skinnard, F. W.
Burden, T. W. Kirby, B. V. Smith, C. (Colchester)
Burke, W. A. Lavers, S. Smith, S. H. (Hull, S. W.)
Champion, A. J. Lee, F. (Hulme) Snow, Capt, J. W.
Coldrick, W. Leonard, W. Sorensen, R. W.
Collick, P. Levy, B. W. Soskice, Maj. Sir F
Collindridge, F. Lewis, A. W. J. (Upton) Sparks, J. A.
Collins, V. J. Lewis, J. (Bolton) Stamford, W.
Colman, Miss G. M. Lindgren, G. S. Stephen, C.
Cook, T. F Lipton, Lt.-Col. M. Strachey, J.
Corbet, Mrs. F. K. (Camb'well, N. W) Longden, F. Strauss, G. R. (Lambeth, N.)
Corlett, Dr. J. Lyne, A. W. Stross, Dr. B.
Cove, W. G. McAdam, W. Stubbs, A. E.
Crawley, A. McAllister, G. Swingler, S.
Crossman, R. H. S. McEntee, V. La T. Symonds, A. L.
Davies, Edward (Burslem) McGhee, H. G. Taylor, H. B. (Mansfield)
Davies, Ernest (Enfield) McKay, J. (Wallsend) Taylor, R. J. (Morpeth)
Davies, Harold (Leek) Mackay, R. W. G. (Hull, N. W.) Taylor, Dr. S. (Barnet)
Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton) McLeavy, F. Thomas, D. E. (Aberdare)
Deer, G. MacMillan, M. K. (Western Isles) Thomas, Ivor (Keighley)
de Freitas, Geoffrey Macpherson, T. (Romford) Thomas, I. O. (Wrekin)
Diamond, J. Mallalieu, J. P. W. Thomas, George (Cardiff)
Dobbie, W. Mann, Mrs. J. Thorneycroft, Harry (Clayton)
Dodds, N. N. Manning, C. (Camberwell, N.) Thurtle, Ernest
Driberg, T. E. N. Marshall, F. (Brightside) Tiffany, S.
Dugdale, J. (W. Bromwich) Mathers, G. Titterington, M. F
Dumpleton, C. W. Mayhew, C. P. Tolley, L.
Durbin, E. F. M. Medland, H. M. Tomlinsdn, Rt. Hon. G.
Dye, S. Mellish, R. J. Vernon, Maj. W. F
Ede, Rt. Hon. J. C. Middleton, Mrs. L. Viant, S. P,
Edwards, John (Blackburn) Mikardo, Ian Wallace, G. D. (Chislehurst)
Edwards, W. J. (Whitechapel) Mitchison, G. R Wallace, H. W. (Walthamstow, E.)
Evans, John (Ogmore) Monslow, W Webb, M. (Bradford, C.)
Ewart, R. Moody, A. S. Weitzman, D,
Fairhurst, F. Morgan, Dr. H. B. Wells, P L. (Faversham)
Farthing, W. J. Morley, R. Wells, W. T (Walsall)
Fernyhough, E. Morris, Lt.-Col. H. (Sheffield, C.) West, D G.
Fletcher, E. G. M. (Islington. E.) Morris, P. (Swansea, W.) White, H. (Derbyshire, N. E.)
Follick, M. Mort, D. L. Whiteley, Rt. Hon. W.
Foot, M. M. Moyle, A. Wigg, Col. G. E.
Forman, J. C. Nally, W. Wilcock, Group-Capt. C. A. B
Freeman, Maj. J. (Watford) Nichol, Mrs. M. E. (Bradford, N.) Wilkes, L.
Ganley, Mrs. C. S Nicholls, H. R. (Stratford) Willey, F. T. (Sunderland)
Gibbins, J Noel-Baker, Rt. Hon P J. (Derby) Willey, O. G. (Cleveland)
Gibson, C. W. Noel-Buxton, Lady Williams, J. L. (Kelvingrove)
Gilzean, A. Oliver, G. H. Williams, Rt. Hon. T. (Don Valley)
Glanville, J. E. (Consett) Orbach, M. Williams, W R. (Heston)
Goodrich, H E. Paget, R. T. Willis, E
Gordon.-Walker, P. C. Paling, Will T. (Dewsbury) Wills, Mrs. E. A
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Wakefield) Palmer, A. M. F. Wilson, J. H
Greenwood, A. W J. (Heywood) Pargiter, G. A. Wise, Major F. J
Grenfell, D. R. Parkin, B. T. Woodburn, A
Griffiths, Rt. Hon. J. (Llanelly) Paton, J. (Norwich) Woodburn, A
Griffiths, W. D. (Moss Side) Pearson, A. Woods, G. S
Guest, Dr. L. Haden Piratin, P Wystt W.
Gunter, R. J. Plaits-Mills, J. F. F. Yates, V. F
Guy, W. H. Poole, Cecil (Lichfield) Young, Sir R. (Newton)
Hale, Leslie Porter, E (Warrington) Younger, Hon. Kennett
Hall, W G. Porter, G. (Leeds) Zilliacus, K
Hannan, W. (Maryhill) Price, M. Philips
Hardman, D. R. Pritt, D. N. TELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Hardy, E. A. Proctor, W. T. Mr. Michael Stewart and
Harrison, J. Purity, Cmdr. H Mr. Popplewell.
NOES.
Assheton, Rt. Hon. R Grimston, R. V. Orr-Ewing, I. L.
Baldwin, A. E. Hannon, Sir P. (Moseley) Peake, Rt. Hon. O
Beamish, Maj. T. V H Hare, Hon. I. H. (Woodbridge) Peto, Brig. C. H. M
Beechman, N. A Head, Brig. A. H. Pitman, I. J.
Bennett, Sir P. Headlam, Lieut.-Col Rt Hon. Sir C. Poole, O. B. S. (Oswestry)
Birch, Nigel Hinchingbrooke, Viscount Raikes, H. V.
Boles, Lt.-Col. O. C. (Wells) Hogg, Hon. Q. Ramsay, Major S
Bossom, A. C. Hope, Lord J. Rayner, Brig. R.
Bowen, R. Hulbert, Wing-Cdr. N. J Reed, Sir S. (Aylesbury)
Boyd-Carpenter, J. A. Hurd, A. Reid, Rt. Hon. J. S C. (Hillhead)
Bracken, Rt. Hon. Brendan Jarvis, Sir G Ross, Sir R. D. (Londonderry)
Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. Jeffreys, General Sir G. Sanderson, Sir F
Butler, Rt Hon. R. A. (S'ffr'n W'ldn) Joynson-Hicks, Hon. L- W. Shepherd, W. S. (Bucklow)
Byers, Frank Kerr, Sir J. Graham Smith, E. P. (Ashford)
Challen, C. Lambert, Hon. G. Spearman, A. C M.
Channon, H. Lancaster, Col. C. G Stanley, Rt. Hon. O.
Clarke, Col. R. S. Law, Rt. Hon. R. K. Strauss, H. G. (English Universities)
Clifton-Brown, Lt.-Col. G. Legge-Bourke, Maj. E. A. H. Stuart, Rt. Hon J. (Moray)
Cole, T. L. Lindsay, M. (Solihull) Sutcliffe, H.
Crosthwaite-Eyre, Col. O E Lipson, D. L. Taylor, Vice-Adm. E. A. (P'dd't'n, S.)
Crowder, Capt. John E Lloyd, Selwyn (Wirral) Teeling, William
Darling, Sir W. Y. Low, Brig. A R. W. Thomas, J. P. L. (Hereford)
Davies, Clement (Montgomery) Lucas-Tooth, Sir H. Thorneycroft, G. E (Monmouth)
Digby, S. W Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. O Touche, G. C.
Dower, Lt.-Col. A. V. G. (Penrith) Mackeson, Brig. H. R- Vane, W. M. F.
Dower, E. L. G. (Caithness) Miclay, Hon. J. S. Wadsworth, G.
Drayson, G. B Macmillan, Rt. Hon. Harold (Bromley) Walker-Smith, D.
Drewe, C. Macpherson, N. (Dumfries) Ward, Hon. G. R.
Dugdale, Maj. Sir T. (Richmond) Marples, A. E. Wheatley, Colonel M. J
Eden, Rt. Hon. A. Marshall, D. (Bodmin) White, Sir D. (Fareham)
Elliot, Rt. Hon. Walter Maude, J. C. Williams, C. (Torquay)
Fletcher, W. (Bury) Mellor, Sir J Williams, Gerald (Tonbridge)
Fraser, H. C. P. (Stone) Molson, A. H. E. Willoughby de Eresby, Lord
Fyfe, Rt. Hon. Sir D. P. M Morris, Hopkin (Carmarthen) Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Galbraith, Cmdr. T. D. Morrison, Maj. J. G. (Salisbury) York, C
Gammans, L. D. Mott-Radclyffe, Maj. C. E.
George, Lady M. Lloyd (Anglesey) Nicholson, G. TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Gomme-Duncan, Col. A. Nield, B. (Chester) Commander Agnew and
Gridley, Sir A. Noble, Comdr A. H. P. Major Conant.

Question put accordingly, "House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

That this The House divided: Ayes, 263; Noes, 113.

Division No. 356.] AYES. [10.49 p.m.
Adams, Richard (Balham) Collins, V. J. Glanville, J. E. (Consett)
Adams, W. T. (Hammersmith, South) Colman, Miss G. M Goodrich, H E
Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. Cook, T. F Gordon,-Walker, P. C
Allen, A. C. (Bosworth) Corbet, Mrs. F. K. (Camb'well, N. W) Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Wakefield)
Allen, Scholefield (Crewe) Corlett, Dr. J Greenwood, A. W. J. (Heywood)
Alpass, J. H. Cove, W. G. Grenfell, D. R.
Anderson A (Motherwell) Crawley, A Griffiths, Rt. Hon. J. (Llanelly)
Anderson, F (Whitehaven) Crossman, R. H. S. Griffiths, W. D. (Moss Side)
Attewell, H. C Davies, Edward (Burstem) Guest, Dr. L. Haden
Austin, H. Lewis Davies, Ernest (Enfield) Gunter, R. J
Awbery, S. S. Davies, Harold (Leek) Guy, W. H
Ayles, W H. Davies, R. J. (Westhoughton) Hale, Leslie.
Ayrton Gould, Mrs. B Deer, G. Hall, W. G.
Balfour, A. de Freitas, Geoffrey Hannan, W. (Maryhill)
Barnes, Rt Hon. A. J. Diamond, J. Hardman, D. R
Barstow, P. G. Dobbie, W. Hardy, E. A.
Barton, C. Dodds, N. N. Harrison, J
Becherve, A. E. Driberg, T. E. N. Haworth, J.
Belcher, J. W. Dugdale, J. (W. Bromwich) Henderson, A. (Kingswinford)
Bing, G. H. C Dumpleton, C. W. Henderson, Joseph (Ardwick)
Binns, J. Durbin, E. F. M Herbison, Miss M.
Blackburn, A. H Dye, S. Hewitson, Capt. M
Blenkinsop, A. Ede, Rt. Hon. J. C. Hobson, C. R
Blyton, W. R. Edwards, John (Blackburn) Holman, P.
Bowden, Flg.-Offr. H. W. Edwards, W. J. (Whitechapel) House, G.
Bowles, F G. (Nuneaton) Evans, John (Ogmore) Hoy, J.
Braddock, Mrs. E. M. (L'pl, Exch'ge) Ewart, R. Hudson, J. H. (Ealing, W.)
Braddock, T. (Mitcham) Fairhurst, F. Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.)
Bramall, E. A. Farthing, W. J. Hughes, H. D. (Wolverhampton, W)
Brook, D (Halifax) Fernyhough, E. Hutchinson, H. L. (Rusholme)
Brown, T. J. (Ince) Fletcher, E. G. M (Islington, E.) Hynd, H. (Hackney, C.)
Buchanan, G Follick, M. Hynd, J. B. (Attercliffe)
Burden, T. W Foot, M. M. Irving, W. J.
Burke, W A Freeman, Maj. J. (Watford) Jay, D. P. T.
Champion, A. J Ganley, Mrs. C. S Jeger, G. (Winchester)
Coldrick, W Gibbins, J. Jeger, Dr. S. W. (St. Pancras, S. E.)
Collick, P. Gibson, C. W Jones, Rt. Hon. A. C. (Shipley)
Collindridge, F. Gilzean, A Jones, D. T. (Hartlepools)
Jones, J. H. (Bolton) Orbach, M. Stross, Dr. B
Jones, P. Asterley (Hitchin) Paget, R. T. Stubbs, A. E.
Keenan, W. Paling, Will T. (Dewsbury) Swingler, S
Kenyon, C Palmer, A. M. F. Symonds, A. L.
King, E. M Pargiter, G. A. Taylor, H. B. (Mansfield)
Kinley, J. Parkin, B. T. Taylor, R. J. (Morpeth)
Kirby, B. V. Paton, J. (Norwich) Taylor, Dr. S. (Barnet)
Lavers, S. Pearson, A. Thomas, D. E. (Aberdare)
Lee, F. (Hulme) Piratin, P Thomas, Ivor (Keighley)
Leonard, W. Platts-Mills, J. F. F. Thomas, I. O (Wrekin)
Levy, B. W. Poole, Cecil (Lichfield) Thomas, George (Cardiff)
Lewis, A. W. J. (Upton) Porter, E. (Warrington) Thorneycroft, Harry (Clayton)
Lewis, J. (Botton) Porter, G. (Leeds) Thurtle, Ernest
Lindgren, G. S. Price, M. Philips Tiffany, S.
Lipton, Lt.-Col. M Pritt, D. N. Titterington, M. F.
Longden, F. Proctor, W. T. Tolley, L.
Lyne, A. W. Pursey, Cmdr. H Tomlinson, Rt. Hon. G.
McAdam, W. Ranger, J. Vernon, Maj. W. F
McAllister, G. Rankin, J Viant, S. P.
McEntee, V. La T. Rees-Williams. J. R Wallace, G. D. (Chislehurst)
McGhee, H. G. Reeves, J. Wallace, H. W. (Walthamstow, E.)
McKay, J. (Wallsend) Reid, T. (Swindon) Webb, M. (Bradford, C.)
Mackay, R. W. G. (Hull, N. W.) Rhodes, H. Weitzman. D
McLeavy, F. Robens, A. Wells, P. L. (Faversham)
MacMillan, M. K. (Western Isles) Robertson, J. J. (Berwick) Wells, W. T (Walsall)
Macpherson, T. (Romford) Rogers, G. H. R. West, D. G.
Mallalieu, J. P W. Ross, William (Kilmarnock) White, H. (Derbyshire, N. E.)
Mann, Mrs. J. Royle, C. Whiteley, Rt. Hon. W.
Manning, C. (Camberwell, N.) Sargood, R. Wigg, Col. G. E.
Marshall, F. (Brightside) Scollan, T. Wilcock, Group-Capt. C. A. B.
Mathers, G. Scott-Elliot, W Wilkes, L.
Mayhew, C. P. Shackleton, E A A. Willey, F. T. (Sunderland)
Medland, H. M Sharp, Granville Willey, O. G. (Cleveland)
Mellish, R. J. Shawcross, C. N. (Widnes) Williams, J. L. (Kelvingrove)
Middleton, Mrs. L Shurmer, P. Williams, Rt. Hon. T. (Don Valley)
Mikardo, Ian Silverman, J. (Erdington) Williams, W R. (Heston)
Mitchison, G. R Silverman, S. S. (Nelson) Willis, E.
Monslow, W Simmons, C. J. Wills, Mrs. E. A.
Moody, A. S. Skeffington, A. M. Wilson, J. H.
Morgan, Dr H B. Skeffington-Lodge, T. G Wise, Major F. J
Morley, R. Skinnard, F. W. Woodburn, A
Morris, Lt.-Col. H. (Sheffield, C.) Smith, C. (Colchester) Woods, G. S
Morris, P. (Swansea, W.) Smith, S. H (Hull, S. W.) Wyatt W.
Mort, D. L. Snow, Capt. J. W. Yates, V. F
Moyle, A. Sorensen, R W Young, Sir R. (Newton)
Nally, W. Soskice, Maj. Sir F Younger, Hon. Kenneth
Nichol, Mrs. M. E. (Bradford, N.) Sparks, J. A Zilliacus K.
Nicholls, H. R. (Stratford) Stamford, W
Noel-Baker, Rt. Hon. P. J. (Derby) Stephen, C. TELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Noel-Buxton, Lady Strachey, S Mr. Michael Stewart and
Oliver, G. H. Strauss, G R. (Lambeth, N.) Mr. Popplewell.
NOES.
Assheton, Rt. Hon. R. Elliot, Rt. Hon. Walter Lucas-Tooth, Sir H.
Baldwin, A. E. Fletcher, W. (Bury) Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. O
Beamish, Maj. T V H Fraser, H. C. P. (Stone) Mackeson, Brig. H. R
Beechman, N. A Fyfe, Rt. Hon. Sir D. P M Maclay, Hon. J. S
Bennett Sir P. Galbraith, Cmdr. T. D. Macmillan, Rt. Hon. Harold (Bromley)
Birch, Nigel Gammans, L. D. Macpherson, N. (Dumfries)
Boles, Lt.-Col D. C (Wells) George, Lady M. Lloyd (Anglesey) Marples, A. E.
Bossom, A. C. Gomme-Duncan, Col. A. Marshall, D. (Bodmin)
Bowen, R. Gridley, Sir A. Maude, J. C.
Bower, N. Grimston, R. V Mellor, Sir J
Boyd-Carpenter, J. A. Hannon, Sir P. (Moseley) Molson, A. H. E.
Bracken, Rt. Hon. Brendan Hare, Hon. J. H. (Woodbridge) Morris, Hopkin (Carmarthen)
Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. Head, Brig. A. H. Morrison, Maj. J. G. (Salisbury)
Butler, Rt Hon. R. A. (S'ffr'n W'ld'n) Headlam, Lieut.-Col Rt. Hon. Sir C. Molt-Radclyffe, Maj. C E.
Byers, Frank Hinchingbrooke, Viscount Nicholson, G.
Challen, C. Hogg, Hon. Q. Nield, B. (Chester)
Channon, H. Hope, Lord J. Noble, Comdr. A. H. P.
Clarke, Col. R. S. Hulbert, Wing-Cdr N. J Orr-Ewing, I. L.
Clifton-Brown, Lt.-Col. G Hurd, A. Peto, Brig. C. H. M.
Cole, T. L. Jarvis, Sir J Pitman, I. J
Conant, Maj. R. J. E. Jeffreys. General Sir G. Poole, O. B. S. (Oswestry)
Crosthwaite-Eyre, Col O E Joynson-Hicks, Hon. L. W. Raikes, H. V.
Crowder, Capt. John E Kerr, Sir J. Graham Ramsay, Major S.
Darling, Sir W. Y. Lambert, Hon. G. Rayner, Brig. R.
Davies, Clement (Montgomery) Lancaster, Col. C G. Reed, Sir S. (Aylesbury)
Digby, S. W. Law, Rt. Hon R. K Reid, Rt. Hon. J. S. C. (Hillhead)
Dower, Lt.-Col. A. V. G. (Penrith) Legge-Bourke, Maj. E. A. H. Ross, Sir R. D. (Londonderry)
Dower, E. L. G. (Caithness) Lindsay, M (Solihull) Sanderson. Sir F
Drayson, G. B. Lipson, D. L. Shepherd, W. S. (Bucklow)
Dugdale, Maj. Sir T. (Richmond) Lloyd, Selwyn (Wirral) Smith, E. P. (Ashford)
Eden, Rt. Hon A Low, Brig. A R. W. Spearman, A C M
Stanley, Rt. Hon. O. Touche, G. C. Williams, Gerald (Tonbridge)
Strauss, H. G. (English Universities) Vane, W. M. F. Willoughby de Eresby, Lord
Stuart, Rt. Hon. J. (Moray) Wadsworth, G. Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Sutcliffe, H. Walker-Smith, D. York, C.
Taylor, Vice-Adm. E. A (P'dd't'n, S.) Ward, Hon. G. R.
Teeling, William Wheatley, Colonel M. J. TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Thomas, J. P. L. (Hereford) White, Sir D. (Fareham) Mr. Drewe and Major Conant.
Thorneycroft, G. E P (Monmouth) Williams, C. (Torquay)