HC Deb 06 June 1951 vol 488 cc1062-93

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

Lieut.-Commander Braithwaite

I wonder if we might have some elucidation of this Clause, which is drafted in the language so dear to the hearts of the Parliamentary draftsmen. Its intention would appear to be benevolent and to give facilities for mobile vans to sell tobacco.

Mr. Poole (Birmingham, Perry Barr)

And snuff.

Lieut.-Commander Braithwaite

I am grateful to the hon. Member, but I was coming to snuff in 10 minutes' time when I had deployed the case regarding tobacco. He has anticipated some observations which I hope to make shortly. If the hon. Member has to leave the Committee, may I assure him that HANSARD tomorrow will be well worth study in regard to my remarks on that topic. In the meantime, he is in a position to obtain a necessary pinch thereof at the door of the Chamber.

Before that untimely interruption took place, I was about to say that, so far as I read the Clause, it is an attempt to provide facilities for the sale of tobacco, in the first instance, in outlying areas where, one imagines, tobacconists' shops are difficult of access during working hours, or may perhaps not even be open at the time when workers in those areas are proceeding to their daily task. If I am right in that interpretation of the intention behind this Clause, there are certain questions which I want to address to the Front Bench opposite.

Are they satisfied that there is a genuine need for this new machinery? I do not recall anything of the kind before. Although it is described in the Clause as temporary—the Commissioners can grant or withhold or cancel licences as the situation may change—we should like elucidation of the circumstances which have caused this to be a matter of importance and urgency this year.

I am open to correction by the Financial Secretary, but I understand there were certain consultations with the trade association concerned in which the Commissioners of Customs and Excise took part, only to encounter considerable resistance to this change in the law. It was based, I gather, not so much upon the danger of competition—although I have no doubt that was present in their minds—as on the difficulty of providing effective safeguards against certain abuses which will be obvious to hon. Members on both sides of the Committee.

6.0 p.m.

This honourable House exists, after all, to take precautions against the evil-doer. We may be told that there are no evildoers in these areas, but a Government which is taking such wide powers to deal with tax evasion should listen to one or two of the objections which might arise in this particular connection. Is it the case that these areas have no other facilities whatever for the purchase of tobacco? If so, perhaps we shall hear later on what those areas are. Is it not the case that there are hardly any areas which are not served at one time or another during the day by grocery delivery vans from some adjacent town or village?

That brings me to the second article to which the Clause refers, and perhaps the Financial Secretary or the Attorney-General can enlighten us on this point. I think I have made a valid argument as regards tobacco. Is there difficulty in obtaining snuff in these outlying areas? What is the snuff potential in those parts? Are the hardy toilers in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland, for instance, experiencing grievous hardship through a shortage of snuff in those areas? Perhaps the right hon. Member for Dunbartonshire, East (Mr. Kirkwood), if he would like to intervene, will tell us, because I am sure that he is well informed on this particular point. One cannot imagine that shortage of machinery for the purchase of snuff in these outlying areas is the main problem. I imagine that if we concentrate upon tobacco, we are dealing with the chief point.

Are there not certain abuses which might arise from the point of view of Excise officers? Would not the existence of a large number of mobile vans, for instance, somewhat facilitate the machinations of receivers of stolen goods? Would it not be easier for them to dispose of illicit tobacco? I have certain experience, not as a receiver of illicit tobacco, but as one who had to deal with the problem of evasion when, during the war, there were a large number of naval shore establishments, each of which had the facility—which I am glad is continued and which will never, I hope, be cancelled—of duty-free tobacco. The fact that they were shore establishments increased the problem of the Excise officers in the possible evasion of duty by the illicit selling of that duty-free tobacco to civilians outside. Does not the existence of a Clause of this nature somewhat open the door to that kind of abuse, or at any rate to such a possibility?

Furthermore, it is the duty of local authorities in all parts of our island to administer and enforce the Shops Act. Do not these mobile vans become retail shops within the meaning of that expression at the moment the Clause is upon the Statute Book? As hon. Members on both sides of the Committee well know, there is a Shops Act which limits, I think quite properly, the hours worked by shop assistants. I am glad to see that I have uprooted for the moment the Parliamentary Private Secretary, which makes me think that a new point is perhaps being uncovered. He is on his way now to seek inspiration, very properly, from under the Gallery for his hon. Friend the Financial Secretary.

Mr. Holmes (Hemsworth) indicated dissent.

Lieut.-Commander Braithwaite

The hon. Member behind the Financial Secretary shakes his head, but I still believe myself to be right.

Is it not a valid point that, as everybody knows, the hours worked by shop assistants are now controlled by Statute, and that if they are going far afield to serve these various areas, unless there is some complicated system by which one driver or salesman relieves another halfway through the day, is it not likely that they will have to spend very long hours on their journeys and only return to the point from which they began long after the hours of work so laid down by the House have expired? I see that Mercury has now returned, and perhaps, therefore, we may expect a pronouncement.

Mr. Jay

The hon. and gallant Member is quite correct about the Shops Act in supposing that it applies to mobile shops.

Lieut.-Commander Braithwaite

I am grateful to the Financial Secretary, because that rather strengthens, not so much the argument, but the submission which I am making. As the Shops Act applies, now we know, to mobile vans, does not the point about the hours of work apply? The Financial Secretary, apparently, is still engaging in consultation, and I do not want to interrupt any addendum there may be to the information which might be coming through, but would it not be a little difficult to enforce the Shops Act in these conditions?

Mr. Glenvil Hall (Colne Valley)

The union will probably see to that.

Lieut.-Commander Braithwaite

How pleased we are to have an intervention during this Committee stage from one whom we used to hear so frequently. It is the second time that the right hon. Member has intervened in our proceedings since we began yesterday, and in each case his interruptions have been to some humble remarks of mine. But the right hon. Member's remarks are unnecessarily concise. We would like him to rise and to expound a little further on this matter, because on this particular question he appears to lack confidence in his successors. We feel very much the same way on this side of the Committee. The right hon. Gentleman has made a most profound intervention, for which the Committee are grateful. When he occupied the Treasury Bench he always had a grasp of the obvious, which we on this side used to admire, and he now makes the resounding contribution that these men, after all, have a union who will look after their interests.

But even a union will have difficulty in getting round this particular problem. The men on the mobile vans will be miles away from home, benighted possibly in the constituency of the right hon. Mem- ber for Dunbartonshire, East, at a time when the right hon. Member is at Westminster and unable to come to their assistance. It might be that they are dispensing tobacco or snuff in the Orkneys and Shetlands, the Member for which important constituency is lamentably absent at the moment when the affairs of his constituents are being discussed, a dereliction of duty for which he, being the Chief Whip of the Liberal Party, should administer the sternest rebuke to himself.

We think also of those in even more far-flung areas of our country, in many of which the roads are impassable during the winter months. A severe winter brings great problems, as you, Major Milner, will be aware, in certain Yorkshire areas, a county which you have represented with so much distinction for so long. A number of hon. Members opposite also represent that same county. They know full well how a hard winter can cause an almost entire hold-up of this essential transport in certain parts of Yorkshire. I say this despite all the assurance of the right hon. Member for Colne Valley—an area which, incidentally, is perhaps affected in such severe weather as that which I have described. Even his distinguished lady opponent may have difficulty in reaching Colne Valley to deliver her election speeches with which she hopes shortly to uproot him.

Be that as it may, will it not be very difficult for the union, or anyone, to see that undue hours are not worked for this purpose?

Mrs. Glenvil Hall indicated dissent.

Lieut.-Commander Braithwaite

The right hon. Gentleman shakes his head in the luxurious comfort of the third bench behind the Government, but he is in a position of greater freedom and lesser responsibility and I am sure he would not look at this in quite so lighthearted a manner were he in charge of the Finance Bill. I do not wish to take up more than a few minutes, because we wish to hear the right hon. Member for Colne Valley on this matter.

This Clause is drafted in obscure language—one can call it nothing else. I have a feeling that the Attorney-General, whom we congratulate on his elevation, would find it difficult to explain the Clause, lucid as he always is, and I plead with him to rise shortly. In the meantime, a poor layman has endeavoured to dissect the meaning, which I think now emerges, that the Clause is entirely for the benefit of mobile vans in the remotest rural areas and that they shall be permitted to sell tobacco and also snuff to the distressed inhabitants thereof. Are we not going to be confronted by difficulties from the point of view of the administration by Excise officers which will cause the Chancellor a year from now a very serious leakage in that revenue which he tells us is sacrosanct by giving competing concessions to other sections of the community?

Mr. A. Edward Davies (Stoke-on-Trent, North)

Before my right hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Glenvil Hall) replies to the hon. and gallant Member's remarks, may I recall that, whatever may be the urges of my right hon. Friend in this matter, it was said that he was too concise. That cannot be said of the hon. and gallant Member for Bristol, North-West (Lieut.-Commander Braithwaite), who took us on a Cook's tour, or some other tour, round the world, which I dare say we enjoyed.

The hon. and gallant Gentleman did not bring out one point. He expressed apprehension about exceeding the hours of work set out in the Shops Act, and thought that the unions would not be able to deal with the matter and suggested there were great dangers of evasion. But I have received representations from another aspect. Is there sufficient tobacco for the people who at present sell tobacco? They have to pay for their licences, it is argued, and they come to me and ask why we should talk about providing new facilities, not only in remote places, but anywhere, apparently—according to the Clause—when in fact there is already more than sufficient competition for the supplies which are made available?

I have to be careful in this matter and not go outside the Clause, but I ask the Minister whether he has inquired into the distribution aspect of the matter. Is he satisfied that in the various areas with the background which has led to the present allocations, they are in fact getting a proper service? I have received representations on this aspect of the matter from an industrial area where a great deal of tobacco is smoked. One man with a considerable business found difficulty in supplying his customers. It would be interesting to know how the position has arisen and whether something will be done, in the event of this Clause being agreed to, to make supplies available both to existing licence holders and others whom the Clause will create.

6.15 p.m.

Mr. Pickthorn

May I ask the hon. Gentleman three questions? First, I am not quite sure from where those who have spoken earlier got the word "remote," and why they assume the remoteness of the district to be concerned. Secondly, the words "exceptional but temporary," occur in line 35, and I find that a little puzzling. I feel sure that in this connection although "exceptional" and "temporary," are not precisely identical, they are very close to each other in meaning; and I do not understand the word "but." What is meant by "exceptional but temporary"? If the need is exceptional, it is almost bound to be temporary, and vice versa, and I do not understand the connotation of "but."

I do not think my first two questions need any apology, but my third question perhaps ought to be apologised for, because perhaps those who are familiar with the law should know the answer already. Subsection (2) authorises the Commissioners to make any conditions they think fit, and I have no doubt that will be exercised with the greatest wisdom and discretion; but I do not think the Committee ought to pass that without more of us than merely the lawyers knowing what are the limitations on that, because as the words stand, on the face of it they give powers to the Commissioners entirely at large. I think we ought to have the subsection explained to us.

Brigadier Thorp (Berwick-upon-Tweed)

One point I should like to hear explained is what is actually meant by the Clause when it says: a registered goods vehicle when stationed at a place specified in the licence. I imagine this Clause is for the benefit of the outlying areas, although nothing is said in the Clause about it. In my constituency there are many villages in the hills from which people cannot always get to the shops to get tobacco, if it is available. Does that mean that in a winter like last winter, when there was a lot of snow, one of these vehicles will be stationed in the hills at a place specified in the licence so that it can go into operation when the "exceptional but temporary" need occurs? Is that what is meant, or is it a special place in a town where the vehicle will be kept in readiness to go into the hills, in which case it will not get there because the roads will be snowed up?

Mr. Frederic Harris (Croydon, North)

This is an important point. Possibly we are approving a step by which the Government could break into the goodwill of established retail tobacco distributors throughout the country. There is a danger of that being permitted to happen without a really justified need being explained by the Government. I believe it is right to say that for approximately all the people in this country there is the ability to buy tobacco quite freely, and one rather doubts whether there is any real need for the Government to satisfy the demands in remote areas.

If this Clause is agreed to, we shall definitely take away some of the goodwill from established distributors throughout the country and take away a considerable amount of their trade. It seems a rather serious infringement on the distributors of tobacco. I hope the Government will try to establish a very real need for such permission to be granted because, otherwise, possibly in due course we shall make it very difficult for many tobacconists to keep going. They are very dependent upon present trade, and in other respects trade in their business is diminishing all the time.

Mr. Jay

The hon. and gallant Member for Bristol, North-West (Lieut.-Commander Braithwaite), made a lucid and informed speech on this important topic, although he did not extend his researches as far as my speech on Second Reading, when I did actually explain what this Clause meant, although naturally my explanation was brief. What the Clause does is to give power to the Customs and Excise to license for the sale of tobacco or snuff a mobile shop as well as what under the present law are, I think, described as premises. As I said en Second Reading, it is a pleasure in at least one Clause of the Finance Bill to be liberating somebody as well as restricting other people in other Clauses.

I do not agree with the hon. Member for Croydon, North (Mr. Frederic Harris), that we should detract competition in the retail trade. Generally speaking, I am in favour of competition in retail distribution. The hon. and gallant Member for Bristol, North-West, asked whether we were satisfied that there was a need for this innovation this year. We are satisfield, largely as a result of the number of applications we have received for these facilities from potential consumers of tobacco and snuff. As a matter of fact, we have had applications affecting travelling fish and chip vans, mobile canteens serving troops and civilians working on a military railway line where there are no facilities for buying tobacco, a mobile confectionery shop and so forth.

The hon. and gallant Gentleman asked what event it was in this particular year that had moved us to introduce the Clause. The main purpose we have in mind is the development of new housing estates and new towns, where a number of houses have been built, but owing to the necessary priorities, in which we put houses in front of shops, the building of houses has exceeded the provision of new shops. Therefore, strictly the answer is that it is the progress of the new towns' programme and the progress of our housing programme generally which has made this necessary this year.

The hon. and gallant Gentleman also asked whether there were no other facilities for the purchase of tobacco by these consumers. Strictly there are other facilities available if the consumer goes far enough to find them; but in our opinion those facilities were not adequate and the consumer could justifiably ask for greater convenience to obtain his tobacco. The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Mr. Edward Davies), asked whether there would be sufficient tobacco available. I do not think it necessarily follows that a very large increase in the consumption of tobacco will result from this change. To some extent those consumers in an area where there is no shop nearby who would have to travel a long way to fetch their tobacco will be able now to get tobacco from the mobile vehicle.

Lieut.-Commander Braithwaite

I am grateful to the Financial Secretary for his explanation, but he is misrepresenting me. I did not say that these people will have to go far afield to get their tobacco. I said I thought there were facilities which would come from far afield to them. Surely on these growing housing estates, and in the new towns and so on, the inhabitants are served by grocery vans which could supply tobacco.

Mr. Jay

To some extent, no doubt, that is true, but the applications we have received convince us that they are inadequate.

The hon. and gallant Gentleman also asked why snuff as well as tobacco was included in this Clause. The answer is that it is due, not to a very great present or growing demand for snuff, but to the fact that these licences apply to tobacco and snuff together, and therefore under the law the two go together.

I was also asked whether we were sure that abuses of various kinds, whether under the Shops Act or abuses of other kinds, can be avoided when this change is made. We are perfectly satisfied that can be done. The hon. Member for Edgbaston (Sir P. Bennett) rebuked us yesterday for saying to the administration, "You cannot do this, can you?" This is a case—I think I reveal no secret when I say it—where there were some outside interests who were keen to say that the Customs would never be able to do this, but the Customs told us that they were perfectly satisfied that they could—

Sir Peter Bennett (Birmingham, Edgbaston)

I told the hon. Gentleman they could.

Mr. Jay

—and I unhesitatingly accept their word in that respect. The hon. Member for Carlton (Mr. Pickthorn) asked three questions. First, he asked whether the word "remote" was really embodied in this arrangement. He is perfectly right. This is not to be confined to remote areas. We are mainly thinking of new housing estates and new towns, but in some cases it would apply to remote areas. He asked why the words, "exceptional but temporary" are included in the Clause, and I think he implied that if the circumstances were temporary there was no need to add the word "exceptional." I should have thought that the two were not necessarily the same.

Surely the circumstances might be exceptional in place as well as in time, and that is one of the senses which I would have taken the Clause to imply. He inquired about subsection (2), which says the licences may be granted subject to such conditions as the Commissioners think fit to impose. What we had in mind there was, first of all, conditions of time or place and, in addition to such conditions, a particular type of consumer, such as a building worker on some out-of-the-way site.

Mr. Pickthorn

That is not exactly my point. The Financial Secretary is kindly telling the Committee what he has in mind that the Commissioners should do. My question was, what is it that the Commissioners cannot do under this? What limitation is there in the Commissioners' discretion in the existing law so far as this Bill is concerned, because there seems to be none?

Mr. Jay

Presumably they can act in any way in which they have the power under the existing law, and this Clause does not further limit their powers in that respect. I think I have answered most of the questions. The purpose of the Clause is simply to provide greater facilities for the consumers of tobacco, and we hope that the Committee will approve of it.

Mr. Hopkin Morris

Arising out of the question by the hon. Member for Carlton (Mr. Pickthorn) about these words "exceptional but temporary," supposing the words were omitted from the Clause, would the Commissioners then have to be satisfied that a licence should be granted? Now the Commissioners have to be satisfied in the exceptional and temporary circumstances, and someone who had an objection to the granting of a licence would have the right of action in a court, which is probably not intended to happen.

Major Legge-Bourke (Isle of Ely)

I should like to ask the hon. Gentleman two other questions which arise out of his statement that this Clause will apply in certain cases to mobile fried fish shops. I do not know whether it is so in other parts of the country, but certainly in my own area these fried fish shops, so far from being temporary or exceptional, are very regular visitors, and are indeed an institution in a great many villages. Unless we have some clarification on this point, there will be an application from almost every travelling fish shop for facilities to be given under this Clause. Is it intended that that should be encouraged, or is it not?

6.30 p.m.

Secondly, in line 37, of page 7, there is the phrase: when stationed at a place specified"— As a rule, fried fish shops have many places where they are regularly stationed. They go the rounds of the areas they cover. Will they have to put in a special application for each place at which they stop, or will a licence be given to cover any place at which they are known to stop regularly?

Mr. Sidney Marshall (Sutton and Cheam)

I should like to know how long the temporary period will be. Will it be six months or a year? Can the hon. Gentleman give any indication?

Captain Crookshank

I do not think that it will be necessary to divide on this Clause, unless any of my hon. Friends have very strong feelings about it, but it is a remarkable provision. The natural implication was that which my hon. Friend took, that this was really dealing with exceptional cases in remote rural areas. What has not been made at all clear is who are the promoters of this suggestion. Obviously it was not the Government, because it is completely contrary to the general Government thesis about shops. Time and again they have told us that there are too many shops. They have been trying to restrict the sources of distribution. In fact, they have gone some way towards that by increasing the tax on petrol which we discussed yesterday. That, by adding to the costs of transport, makes the businesses which require transport less attractive.

Who has asked for this concession? It was never asked for during the war when people were working in the most remote parts of the country, some on aerodrome construction and others in various jobs in the North of Scotland and other parts of the island. There were other areas where enemy destruction was such that a great range of shops were destroyed, but nobody suggested selling tobacco either in caravans or buses, or in whatever way the procedure is to be in future.

One wonders what has prompted this suggestion. The Financial Secretary to the Treasury said that it was because of the development of the housing estates. I must say that if we have had to wait until this year for that need to emerge, it is a serious reflection on the housing policy of the Government. If there had been a lot of housing done, and this was at the back of it, this step would have been asked for three years ago. But it is only now emerging. We can reach our own conclusions about that.

But when the Financial Secretary says that we ought to praise this action, because for once in a way the Government are liberating someone—they are making it easier for someone to sell tobacco—he overlooks the fact that unless more tobacco is provided they are simultaneously reducing the sales of somebody else. That man will not look upon his as a liberating measure; but pro tanto if sufficient tobacco were put on the market wherever there were shortages, that would meet the point of the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Mr. Edward Davies) and of a great number of would-be consumers who, even today, find difficulty in getting the brands which they want.

On the question of liberation, that is something we welcome, provided the other action is taken as well. But the hon. Gentleman had better carry the matter a little further. It has been most difficult for people who want to open shops to get the necessary facilities. It has been difficult to get permission to sell sweets, and that is a business which very often goes with that of a small retail tobacconist. The Minister of Food is very slow about giving any of the necessary permissions for that purpose. Even the greengrocery trade for ex-Service men has been more or less a closed one owing to the action of the Government.

If we are to liberate shops, let us liberate on a great deal larger scale and make sure that the supplies are there to be sold. But, as the Government's real policy is a restrictive one all the time, that makes it all the more strange that, on the question of one of the commodities in which there is a general shortage, they go out of their way to create more channels of distribution. Housing estates or no—and I do not really accept that as a good argument—I should like to know whether it was not the Co-ops who were at the back of all this. I am pretty sure that it is some arrangement which has been concluded between these two parties which are very intimate political friends.

Even on the housing estates, where, according to the Financial Secretary, the need has just arisen, have the people who live on these estates no opportunity at all of buying any tobacco? I should like to see one of these extraordinary housing estates which is so large that it requires a mobile shop all to itself to sell tobacco, and which is so remote that nobody who lives on the estate has any means of buying any tobacco anywhere else. It is just ridiculous, but it is completely in line with everything else which comes from the hon. Gentleman.

Mr. J. C. Maude (Exeter)

I wish to ask the Committee to consider seriously an aspect which was not mentioned by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Bristol, North-West (Lieut.-Commander Braithwaite). It is one which concerns me deeply. It is the question of dishonesty being promoted by this Clause. Stocks which move, quite properly, by a van from the place where the stock is ordinarily held to the place of distribution are, in a sense, under proper control. I am sure, however, that the Committee will not mind if I remind them that one of the greatest possible nuisances in the last few years so far as crime has been concerned has been the wholesale stealing of cigarettes and tobacco. I think that we all know that: it has been a perfect curse.

Is not this provision likely to promote thieving? The fellows who steal tobacco and cigarettes at present only do it when they know that they can find some method of disposing of those goods. It is a well-known saying that if there were no receivers there would be no thieves. Apparently, it is not too difficult to find receivers. Nevertheless, facilities by way of receivers would be welcomed by some of the community who are quite prepared to rob the public.

What will happen under this Clause? A van will be sent out, not in the control of the owner of the shop who, presumably, stays at his base. The van will be sent out in the charge of a fellow who probably is not very well paid. He will be entrusted with most valuable goods. No doubt he will be subject to control on the goods which he takes into stock for sale. But the fraternity of whom I am thinking are most anxious to meet the van on the way and put into it stolen stuff. It can never be checked. The van driver, having been suborned by the possibility of making a great deal of money by selling the tobacco and cigarettes, disposes of them at his destination.

The only possible way of controlling activities like that is a perfectly odious one from the point of view of the employee. It is by arranging for surprise searches of his van to see whether it has on board more stock than it had when it started the journey. The temptation is a very great one, if, in fact, two or three cartons of cigarettes are loaded into a van on the road. Does it not seem likely that, other things being equal, persons who are not crooks at all, but lorry drivers who may be in difficult circumstances, due to ill-health in the family, and so on, will be gravely tempted to dispose of cigarettes most rapidly, because the fact is that these sales take place in busy industrial areas where very quick sales are possible? The money will go into the pocket of the man who has been tempted by this most undesirable Clause.

When I heard my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Captain Crookshank) asking, a few moment ago, who had asked for this proposal, although I know it is possible for people to laugh at it, I thought it was a serious and important question. How does it come about? As far as I know, we have done quite well all through my lifetime with the present arrangments for the distribution of tobacco and cigarettes. I have no personal interest in any tobacconist at all, but I should have thought that, if we are now going to do this, every small shopkeeper would start quaking, knowing that no longer will tobacco and cigarettes be bought at his shop, but that people will buy them in remote districts and take their trade away from the shops where they used to buy.

I am willing to offer every facility for people to enjoy themselves if they want to, but I am not prepared to support this proposal, unless we have an assurance that the police have been consulted, and that they have advised that, in their view, it is not likely to increase the stealing and disposal of an extremely valuable and compact commodity—tobacco. Are we not shutting our eyes to what goes on, if we do not realise that a great number of our fellow-citizens are not angels? Thefts of tobacco and cigarettes have been enormous. It is humbug to pretend that it is not so, and yet we have had no explanation as to how this aspect of the matter, which must have been in the mind of the Government, was regarded, because we know that we have had information from the tobacco interests that they are disturbed about this particular Clause.

The Committee must know that, in general, there has been anxiety about the dishonesty aspect of this matter, not merely because people want to have some security about their sales, which is very reasonable, but because of the reason in which I am particularly interested, which is that it is high time that this Committee took very great care indeed that it does absolutely nothing which would lead to an increase in crime of this kind, in which the goods are quite impossible to trace. We can trace watches, and, possibly, jewellery, even when it has been broken up, but cigarettes which have been taken out of their cartons and packets are quite impossible to trace, and I should have thought that it is only reasonable to ask the Minister, as I ask him now, for an assurance that the police authorities have pronounced this proposal all right and have said that they are not worried about it. If they have said so, so be it, but, if not, or if they have not been consulted, we should vote against the Clause.

6.45 p.m.

Sir Ian Fraser (Morecambe and Lonsdale)

In a free economy where there are ample supplies, I would welcome any attempt to make distribution more widespread, but this is not a free economy, and I cannot see myself how we can expect, within a measureable time, ample and unrestricted supplies of tobacco.

That being so, I want to put in a plea for the village shop. In my constituency, there are hundreds of village shops, and they render most valuable services to the community, which depends upon them for the sale of a great many commodities, one of the most important among which is tobacco and cigarettes. It is not a very big turnover which is involved, but it is very important. Apparently, from what I can gather, we are going to undermine this very important trade in selling tobacco and cigarettes by permitting moving vehicles, notably fried fish shops, to proceed to the village—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]

If that is not the case, I hope the Minister will set my anxieties at rest, but I understood that to be the case. I cannot think of anything less compatible than fried fish and cigarettes. The two things ought not to be put together, in any event; it is unethical and unaesthetic. In a world where there is a limited amount of any commodity, we ought to think twice before we deliberately set travelling competition against the village shop, which is an English institution greatly valued by the people who live in the countryside, and one of the sources of our strength and comfort.

Mr. Reeves (Greenwich)

Listening to the arguments put forward by hon. Members opposite, one would have imagined that there were no such things as travelling shops in this country, and that the proposal now put forward is an innovation. May I assure them that, only within the last few weeks, it has been my privilege to inspect a whole exhibition of travelling shops which are used in this country for multiple purposes. It is a legitimate trading business which is carried on all the time, and there are literally hundreds of travelling shops in this country carrying on legitimate trading in districts where it is absolutely essential that those goods should go to those people in that way, because, otherwise, they would be denied supplies.

The proposal which is now being made is a very simple one. It is that these shops should have the opportunity of selling tobacco like the ordinary static shop, which has a licence for the purpose. Surely no one will deny that that is a legitimate form of business, and it is a pity that there has been this opposition to the proposal. It may well be that hon. Members opposite object to this kind of competition, but I was under the impression that they were in favour of competition. Apparently, however, they resent it, and, when anything of an enterprising nature comes along, they go out to kill it.

Brigadier Prior-Palmer (Worthing)

I think the hon. Member for Greenwich (Mr. Reeves), who has just spoken, very nearly let the cat out of the bag. Now we know what is behind this Clause. I want to add a few words to those which have already been said on behalf of the small man. I do not think I know of a single village or hamlet in England, however small, which has not got its own sweets and tobacco shop. I know of no area in which one cannot obtain tobacco or cigarettes by walking a few hundred yards down the street. In my view, it is not a question of our dislike of competition. Our dislike is directed against unfair competition, which is a very different thing indeed.

The Assistant Postmaster-General (Mr. Hobson)

Define it.

Brigadier Prior-Palmer

I will define it very quickly. We may have a little village in which there is a postmistress, possibly a widow, running the post office, which is also a tobacco shop, in which she is capable of earning a living, although not so easily in these days of short allocations of tobacco and cigarettes. Along comes the Co-op—and if the hon. Gentleman opposite will read the Clause, he will see that it refers to "registered goods vehicles." Who but a big store is capable of having a registered goods vehicle? Am I going to see the Co-op milk van going round selling tobacco as well as milk? If it does, will it not knock the whole of the small tobacco shop industry out of action altogether? That is why I would very much like to see this side of the Committee vote against the Clause.

Mr. Glenvil Hall

I would not have intervened in this debate, in spite of what we have heard from hon. Members opposite, but for the speech of the hon. and gallant Member for Worthing (Brigadier Prior-Palmer) and that of the hon. Member for Morecambe and Lonsdale (Sir I. Fraser) who preceded him. I think the Opposition have completely misread this Clause. It is all very well to say that this provision will hit the village shop, which the hon. Member for Morecambe and Lonsdale said is one of the great bulwarks of this country. That, however, is not what will happen. The Clause says that a licence will only be granted for an exceptional and temporary need. If there is a shop selling tobacco in a village, then, quite obviously, such a licence would not be issued to a registered goods van plying in that area. [An HON. MEMBER: "Who says that?"] The Clause says that the need must be exceptional and temporary, and, quite obviously, if there is a village shop selling tobacco, there would be no reason for issuing such a licence.

Sir I. Fraser

Does it follow, then, that if a licence to go temporarily to an exceptional place is granted the person receiving the licence would not be allowed to sell cigarettes to anyone, even if that person bought fried fish from him?

Mr. Glenvil Hall

I honestly cannot answer that, but I do know that the gloss which has been placed on the Clause by the hon. Gentleman cannot truthfully be read into it. The need must be exceptional, and it must be temporary.

I want to take up the point made more than once by hon. Members opposite that, in some way, this Clause is designed to help the Co-operative Society. No doubt the Co-operative as a multiple store may occasionally apply for a licence of this sort, and why should it not? But it is not, as one hon. Member asserted, the only multiple store which has registered goods vehicles. Almost every grocer and the suppliers of all sorts of goods and services in the country have to register their vehicles. To assert, therefore, that because a vehicle is a registered vehicle it must be a Co-operative vehicle is not only completely untrue, but, if I may say so, completely unworthy of right hon. and hon. Members opposite. Quite frankly, all that the Treasury are doing here is to provide for a need which has existed for some years, and which, in my view, should have been met in a Finance Bill long before this.

Commander Maitland (Horncastle)

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman a simple question and one easier to answer than that put to him by my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lonsdale (Sir I. Fraser)? Has he ever received from any of his constituents a request that such a service should be granted?

Mr. Glenvil Hall

I happen to represent a constituency which, in winter, is often snowbound. It is a serious complaint among people who live in remote villages on the main spur of the Pennines, an area which I represent, that in winter they are unable to reach the nearest town because the bus service is inadequate. [Laughter.] It is inadequate because the vehicles cannot negotiate the bends and the hills in that particular area. It is not a nationalised service, but a private enterprise company. It says that it cannot make a route of that kind pay. Therefore, the villagers would prefer to have vans coming to them with the goods they need in order to obviate the trouble, difficulty, and discomfort of their having to walk to the nearest town.

Commander Maitland

Have they specifically asked for tobacco to be supplied to them in this way?

Mr. Glenvil Hall

Even if they did, it would not come within the four corners of this Clause because the need would be permanent and would not be temporary or exceptional. We must remember that we are here dealing with peculiar and particular cases which do not occur all over the country and in every area.

Captain Crookshank

As the right hon. Gentleman is opening up such an interesting theme, may I ask him what guarantee he has, if village people cannot come to more populated areas to buy tobacco because of the weather, that vans would be able to go to the villages in that weather, which would be the same whichever way one went?

Mr. Glenvil Hall

None whatever. I am not raising objection to this Clause. The objection to it is coming from hon. Members opposite, who pose to the general public as people who desire greater liberty and who do not like to see industry fettered. I only rose to say that the suggestion put forward by hon. Members opposite that this is an attempt to help the Co-operative Societies and that there has been some sort of sinister bargain struck between my right hon. and hon. Friends on the Treasury Bench with the great multiple stores known as the Co-operative Wholesale Society, is unworthy of them. Finally, if hon. Members opposite believe, too, as has been suggested by one hon. Member, that this provision will increase crime in this country, then it is their bounden duty to vote against it.

Mr. I. J. Pitman (Bath)

It is always a great pleasure to listen to the right hon. Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Glenvil Hall), who was the Minister in charge of the Bill on which I made my maiden speech, and I know that all hon. Members on this side of the Committee like to hear him. He has, however, impugned the truth and propriety of our objections to this Clause. It is not that they are in any way untruthful or unworthy, but that the hon. Member for Greenwich (Mr. Reeves), who spoke before him, imported into this issue a matter both of confusion and of very great sinister importance. In regard to the confusion, I think he brought in the question of whether or not the van is a mobile van. As I understand the Clause, the van has to be stationary.

That leads me to ask the Financial Secretary why it must be a registered vehicle. If it is to meet a temporary and a very exceptional need, what is wrong with the good old horse? Why should it not be a horse-drawn cart or caravan? Anybody who goes to Hyde Park Corner can see that sort of vehicle. Although I do not think it is a registered vehicle, it is an excellent temporary expedient for meeting a need of this kind.

Again, why should not the needs of the people be met by the small man with a little hand-trundled thing, like they have at Hyde Park Corner which he will bring out to the temporary station from which vending is taking place? I see that the hon. Member for Greenwich (Mr. Reeves) is shaking his head.

7.0 p.m.

Mr. Reeves

The hon. Member is going back to the 19th century.

Mr. Pitman

This is a temporary exceptional need which has to be met. Why have a high-powered motor vehicle to carry it out? But the hon. Member for Greenwich referred to a fleet of such vehicles which he inspected.

Mr. Reeves

I thank the hon. Member for giving way and affording me an opportunity to correct him. I said that I had seen an exhibition of vehicles, all manner of vehicles made by different manufacturers who provide the type of mobile van used for trading purposes.

Mr. Pitman

I am sorry if I misheard or misinterpreted the hon. Member, but I understood him to say that that was for a multiple store and was such a fleet of vehicles.

Mr. Reeves

I must have been entirely misunderstood. I said that there were many traders in this country who used this type of van and that I had seen an exhibition of them, a great variety of vans which were used for all manner of trading purposes.

Mr. Pitman

I distinctly heard the hon. Member use the word "multiple" and it was that which raised in our minds this question of a multiple store. It is that which has introduced the sinister aspect of the problem to which my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Gainsborough (Captain Crookshank) is drawing attention. We would ask the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, if he really is trying to get the small van to trade in the exceptional district in this way, he will make it instead of a registered vehicle any vehicle which can be stationed within the terms of this Clause.

It seems to me undue preference has been given to the multiple store and I do not mind whether it is Lipton's or the Co-op. We wish any temporary vehicle of this kind to be such a temporary vehicle that if there is really the need for it the small man can do the job as well as the big man.

Sir William Darling (Edinburgh, South)

I would not have intervened in this discussion but for the intervention of my distinguished friend the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Glenvil Hall). I think he and his hon. Friend the Member for Greenwich (Mr. Reeves) are a little more disingenuous than the Committee would be inclined to believe. There is no question that this provision is designed entirely to benefit the Co-operative societies and I am not one to cavil at their enterprise.

Since the war it has been impossible for the small trader to get new shop premises anywhere in this country, by and large, but it has not been impossible for the Co-operative Societies to get them not only in new areas but in reconstructed areas, and they are very enterprising wherever they go. They can do what the small shopkeeper cannot do. I am subject to challenge and contradiction, but I think they have been the largest buyers of travelling vehicles in this country for the last five years. They have put more vehicles of that kind on the road than any other business concern. It may be that they have shown great enterprise, but, of course, they have been able to command large sources of capital.

In Walkerburn, the village where I live, it is beyond the capacity of the small shopkeeper to put on the road a vehicle costing £5,000, but even Co-operative Societies with weak finances can do so, because they are backed by the Central Scottish Co-operative Society or the Co-operative Wholesale Society in England.

It is a notable fact that in whatever field the Co-operative Wholesale Society has been successful, it has never produced a tobacco which was smokable. If hon. Members want support for that view, they should go to the Tea Room here, where they will hear Co-operative Members, sent here by the Co-operative Party, say, "No thank you, give me Player's or Churchman's, not Co-operative." Faced with that disinclination of the public taste, the Co-operative Societies are meeting it courageously, enterprisingly and commandingly. I do not blame those who represent them for speaking as they do, and they must not blame me if I speak as I do.

This is entirely a Co-operative matter. I defy hon. Members opposite to tell me of any sort of multiple trader able to find the permission and the capital to put on the road these elaborate and costly vehicles. It is only the Co-operative Societies which can do so.

Mr. Mitchison (Kettering) rose—

Sir W. Darling

Please let me finish my sentence. It is only the Co-operative Societies who have the capital and the influence with those who give permits to get these vehicles.

Mr. Mitchison

I do not know about the hon. Member's large multiple stores, but, unlike the Tory Party, I have some interest in the prosperity of the small man. I have several small traders who run vans round outlying parts of my constituency. They will be very glad indeed to avail themselves of the very reasonable provisions of this Clause. I do not think they will thank the Tory Party, no more than will the co-operators, for showing so lavishly their hostility to small trading and co-operative enterprise.

Sir W. Darling

I hope the hon. Member's constituents will duly mark the hon. Member's equal and impartial support of the Co-operative movement and of private enterprise. It will not commend him to the Kettering Co-operative Society which is a very powerful organisation and helps him a good deal in elections. When that Society learns of the hon. Member's balanced, dispassionate statement, it might also apply that judgment to the support, financial and personal, it renders to him.

Let us tear away this veil of specious pretence displayed by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Colne Valley. If those who want this Clause said, "This Co-operative movement is growing, it is adding millions to its membership every year, it is destined to control the whole community, it has money, it has enterprise and we intend to crush every small trader," if the Government said that, I should accept it and take up the challenge to free enterprise. But that is not what they say. We have special pleadings for the small traders and the convenience of the constituents of the right hon. Member for Colne Valley; but the real reasons are that this great Co-operative monopoly seeks to crush the village store. If the hon. Members opposite definitely said so, no one on this side of the Committee would object; but this mask, screen and pretence is nauseous humbug and detestable, and we have a right to oppose it.

Mr. Mitchison

I really welcome in a debate in Committee on the Finance Bill the appearance of a little cheerfulness on the benches opposite. We have been told so very often that for lack of representation by hon. Members opposite the country was going to the dogs. It has never got there yet and is never likely to until they get in. But it is quite a change to see them cheerful. I am glad of it and I hope that they will try to keep it up through the whole of our discussion.

Never have I heard anything more ridiculous in my life than the sort of point that is being put forward now. Here is a concession being made to provide for the sale of tobacco and snuff from registered goods vehicles in exceptional and temporary circumstances. I am not so concerned as the hon. Member for Edinburgh, South (Sir W. Darling), with the competing qualities of different kinds of cigarettes. I prefer pipe tobacco, and I may tell the hon. Member that both in the choice of the name and in the choice of the substance the Co-operative move- ment, in selling "Equity," does exceedingly well. That is the name of the brand. How terrible that a man who has never tried any of these tobaccos should immediately, and out of sheer prejudice, declare that the Co-operative movement is unable to make a decent and smokable tobacco.

Sir W. Darling

The view I have formed of Co-operative tobacco is not from experience, it is true, but it is on the advice of the hon. and learned Member's hon. Friends on the benches opposite who prefer non-Co-op brands in this House of Commons.

Mr. Mitchison

Unlike the hon. Gentleman, I prefer to form my conclusions and judgments at first and not at second hand.

Mrs. Jean Mann (Coatbridge and Airdrie)

Might I add this for the benefit of the hon. Member for Edinburgh, South (Sir W. Darling)? One of the most famous knights in Scotland and one of the greatest employers of labour, if not the greatest employer of labour, in all Scotland, smokes nothing but "Cogent" and does not even know that it is a Co-operative tobacco.

Mr. Mitchison

There is little I can add to that. What we are considering is a licence to provide for an exceptional and temporary need by selling tobacco and snuff from registered goods vehicles. I have already pointed out, and I repeat it, that my experience is not that of the hon. Member for Edinburgh, South. I find that registered goods vehicles are used for the purpose of trading in the villages in my constituency, not only by the excellent Co-operative enterprise that functions in those parts but also by small traders and, for that matter, by somewhat larger traders, too. I am not really so jealous or concerned about the particular enterprise which sells the tobacco or snuff as I am concerned with providing tobacco and snuff from these goods vehicles when there is an exceptional or temporary need, which means, in effect, when the people who want to smoke or take snuff cannot get it in any other way.

I should have thought it was carrying party politics to a ludicrous degree of prejudice to find in a Clause like this some subtle manoeuvre to favour the Co-operative movement or some subtle attempt to score some advantage out of this particular form of licence, which would not be obtainable in any other way. I think that the Tory Party might do a little better than this. If that is all they can find in a perfectly reasonable, sensible and useful provision of this sort, I can only say that I have never met a more glaring instance of a number of apparently sensible people being blinded by prejudice into producing absurdity after absurdity.

7.15 p.m.

Mr. Pickthorn

I want to ask one very short question of the Minister. He told us that this Clause was in response to many requests from consumers. Can we have that documented? Does he really mean consumers or does he mean persons wishing to sell? I think that the Committee is unable to come to a conclusion without proper information of what this is all about. It was not I who introduced the Co-operative point—nor do I attach great importance to the Co-operative point—but since the matter has been introduced and pressed strongly, both openly and disguisedly, we ought now to know the numerous requests which the Treasury has received, and from whom those requests came.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir Thomas Moore (Ayr)

I only intervene in this debate because I am personally associated with a firm which sells merchandise from mobile vans, but in this case it is for one definite purpose and that is to reach the really isolated people who want to read books but who cannot get books at the local village pub or store. That is the one justification in my opinion for using these mobile shops, for that is what they are.

I challenge most of the country Members to find a village where they will be able to get a decent book or, in fact, any book to read; but, as my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lonsdale (Sir I. Fraser) and others, have said, they will find shops in every village where one can procure some form of tobacco and cigarettes; I am not saying whether it is Co-op tobacco or any other, but there will certainly be some form of smokable tobacco and cigarettes. There may not be snuff, but I do not think that habit is wide enough to constitute an urgent demand.

Why is there this discrimination in favour of tobacco and cigarettes? Why not whisky? Is it because there is no whisky to put into the mobile vans, and, if so, surely tobacco and cigarettes run the whisky pretty close? There is no back-door effort to destroy one of the most progressive trades in Scotland; the Government do not seek to license mobile vans to sell whisky as well. No, the whole thing comes down to one issue, and it is this.

There is no hon. Member opposite who has even sought to justify this Clause, and when the right hon. Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Glenvil Hall) tried to assist the Government Front Bench, I cannot congratulate him upon his success. I like him personally so much that I hate to launch this good-humoured attack on him, but for the sake of any Clause which the Government Front Bench hope to get in this Committee, I would suggest that he relieves them of his support next time, or else goes to his old friends, the Treasury, beforehand and gets a suitable brief.

In passing, I hope he will not take these remarks in any personal sense whatsoever. Everyone on this side of the Committee has a great respect for him and used to marvel at his ingenuity and patience when he tried to do the job which his hon. Friend has not done with anything like the same ability.

Many arguments have been made against this Clause by my hon. Friends. Personally, when I first read the Clause I was not greatly prejudiced one way or the other against it, but as I listened to the arguments against it from my hon. Friends on this side of the Committee and as I listened to the feeble support from hon. Members opposite, I became more and more convinced that the Clause was completely unnecessary and should be opposed.

Captain Crookshank

We have much more business to do on this Finance Bill, but I should like to say that we are much indebted to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Bristol, North-West (Lieut.-Commander Braithwaite) for having instituted the debate on this Clause, because it has been quite clear that it has interested hon. Members very much, particularly from the point of view of trying to find out why it ever got into the Finance Bill at all I hazarded a guess, and no one from among those on the benches opposite who should know best has denied its possibility. No Co-operative Member has got up with his hand on his heart and said that he never suggested such a thing in his life and would never dream of doing so. The Minister has never got up and said that there has never been any contact between the two groups on this issue. No one has told us who was responsible.

The right hon. Member for Colne Valley (Mr. Glenvil Hall) was good enough to say that this had been necessary for years past. It is very strange that no one ever heard of it until April this year, and that the necessity was somehow overlaid by more urgent business during the time that the right hon. Gentleman was at the Treasury. I must admit that in the many years I was there I never heard this suggestion, although war-time might have been the time when

it was necessary to have exceptional and temporary arrangements, certainly exceptional and, thank goodness, temporary. The war did come to an end just as in good time the Socialist Government will come to an end so perhaps to that extent this is a temporary measure.

As we have other things to do, I do not suppose that many of my hon. Friends wish to prolong this debate, but in view of the great amount of hostility shown against this Clause and the lack of any further explanation from the Government as to what they are up to and why they are doing this, I can only say that if a Division is challenged I shall certainly go into the Lobby against the Clause.

Question put, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 295; Noes, 279.

Division No. 84.] AYES [7.22 p.m.
Acland, Sir Richard Craddock, George (Bradford, S.) Grey, C. F.
Adams, Richard Crawley, A. Griffiths, David (Rother Valley)
Albu, A. H. Crosland, C. A. R. Griffiths, Rt. Hon. James (Llanelly)
Allen, Arthur (Bosworth) Crossman, R. H. S. Griffiths, William (Exchange)
Allan, Scholefield (Crewe) Cullen, Mrs. A. Gunter, R. J.
Anderson, Alexander (Motherwell) Daines, P. Hale, Joseph (Rochdale)
Anderson, Frank (Whitehaven) Dalton, Rt. Hon. H. Hale, Leslie (Oldham, W.)
Awbery, S. S. Darting, George (Hillsborough) Hall, John (Gateshead, W.)
Ayles, W. H. Davies, A. Edward (Stoke, N.) Hall, Rt. Hon. Glenvil (Colne Valley)
Bacon, Miss Alice Davies, Harold (Leek) Hamilton, W. W.
Baird, J. Davies, Stephen (Merthyr) Hannan, W.
Balfour, A. de Freitas, Geoffrey Hardman, D. R.
Barnes, Rt. Hon. A. J. Deer, G. Hardy, E. A.
Bartley, P. Delargy, H. J. Hargreaves, A.
Bellenger, Rt. Hon. F. J. Dodds, N. N. Harrison, J.
Benn, Wedgwood Donnelly, D. Hastings, S.
Benson, G. Driberg, T. E. N. Hayman, F. H.
Beswick, F. Dugdale, Rt. Hon. John (W. Bromwich) Henderson, Rt. Hon. Arthur (Tipton)
Bevan, Rt. Hon. A. (Ebbw Vale) Dye, S. Herbison, Miss M.
Bing, G. H. C. Ede, Rt. Hon. J. C. Hewitson, Capt. M.
Blenkinsop, A. Edelman, M. Hobson, C. R.
Blyton, W. R. Edwards, John (Brighouse) Holman, P.
Boardman, H. Edwards, Rt. Hon. Ness (Caerphilly) Holmes, Horace (Hemsworth)
Booth, A. Edwards, W. J. (Stepney) Houghton, D.
Bottomley, A. G. Evans, Albert (Islington, S. W.) Hoy, J.
Bowles, F. G. (Nuneaton) Evans, Edward (Lowestoft) Hubbard, T.
Braddock, Mrs. Elizabeth Evans, Stanley (Wednesbury) Hudson, James (Ealing, N.)
Brook, Dryden (Halifax) Ewart, R. Hughes, Emrys (S. Ayrshire)
Brooks, T. J. (Normanton) Fernyhough, E. Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.)
Broughton, Dr. A. D. D. Field, Capt. W. J. Hughes, Moelwyn (Islington, N.)
Brown, Rt. Hon. George (Belper) Finch, H. J. Hynd, H. (Accrington)
Brown, Thomas (Ince) Fletcher, Eric (Islington, E.) Hynd, J. B. (Attercliffe)
Burke, W. A. Follick, M. Irvine, A. J. (Edge Hill)
Burton, Miss E. Foot, M. M. Irving, W. J. (Wood Green)
Butler, Herbert (Hackney, S.) Forman, J. C. Isaacs, Rt. Hon. G. A.
Callaghan, L. J. Fraser, Thomas (Hamilton) Janner, B.
Carmichael, J. Freeman, John (Watford) Jay, D. P. T.
Castle, Mrs. B. A. Freeman, Peter (Newport) Jeger, George (Goole)
Champion, A. J. Gaitskell, Rt. Hon. H. T. N. Jeger, Dr. Santo (St. Pancras, S.)
Chetwynd, G. R. Ganley, Mrs. C. S. Jenkins, R. H.
Clunie, J. Gibson, C. W. Johnson, James (Rugby)
Cocks, F. S. Gilzean, A. Johnston, Douglas (Paisley)
Coldrick, W. Glanville, James (Consett) Jones, David (Hartlepool)
Collindridge, F. Gooch, E. G. Jones, Frederick Elwyn (W. Ham, S.)
Cook, T. F. Gordon-Walker, Rt. Hon. P. C. Jones, Jack (Rotherham)
Cooper, John (Deptford) Greenwood, Anthony (Rossendale) Jones, William Elwyn (Conway)
Corbet, Mrs. Freda (Peckham) Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Arthur (Wakefield) Keenan, W.
Cove, W. G. Grenfell, D. R. Kenyon, C.
Key, Rt. Hon. C. W. O'Brien, T. Summerskill, Rt. Hon. Edith
King, Dr. H. M. Oldfield, W. H. Sylvester, G. O.
Kinghorn, Sqn. Ldr. E. Oliver, G. H. Taylor, Bernard (Mansfield)
Kinley, J. Orbach, M. Taylor, Robert (Morpeth)
Kirkwood, Rt. Hon. D. Padley, W. E. Thomas, David (Aberdare)
Lang, Gordon Paget, R. T. Thomas, George (Cardiff)
Lee, Frederick (Newton) Paling, Rt. Hon. W. (Dearne Valley) Thomas, Iorwerth (Rhondda, W.)
Lee, Miss Jennie (Cannock) Paling, Will T. (Dewsbury) Thomas, Ivor Owen (Wrekin)
Lever, Harold (Cheetham) Pannell, T. C. Thorneycroft, Harry (Clayton)
Lever, Leslie (Ardwick) Pargiter, G. A. Thurtle, Ernest
Lewis, Arthur (West Ham, N.) Parker, J. Timmons, J.
Lewis, John (Bolton, W.) Paton, J. Tomney, F.
Lindgren, G. S. Pearson, A. Turner-Samuels, M.
Lipton, Lt.-Col. M. Peart, T. F. Ungoed-Thomas, Sir Lynn
Logan, D. G. Poole, C. Usborne, H.
Longden, Fred (Small Heath) Popplewell, E. Vernon, W. F.
McAllister, G. Porter, G. Viant, S. P.
MacColl, J. E. Price, Philips (Gloucestershire, W.) Watkins, T. E.
McGhee, H. G. Proctor, W. T. Webb, Rt. Hon. M. (Bradford, C.)
McGovern, J. Pryde, D. J. Weitzman, D.
McInnes, J. Pursey, Cmdr. H. Wells, Percy (Faversham)
Mack, J. D. Rankin, J. Wells, William (Walsall)
McKay, John (Wallsend) Rees, Mrs. D. West, D. G.
Mackay, R. W. G. (Reading, N.) Reeves, J. Wheatley, Rt. Hon. John (Edinb'gh E.)
McLeavy, F. Reid, Thomas (Swindon) White, Mrs. Eirene (E. Flint)
MacMillan, Malcolm (Western Isles) Reid, William (Camlachie) White, Henry (Derbyshire, N. E.)
McNeil, Rt. Hon. H. Rhodes, H. Whiteley, Rt. Hon. W.
MacPherson, Malcolm (Stirling) Richards, R. Wigg, G.
Mainwaring, W. H. Robens, Rt. Hon. A. Wilcock, Group Capt. C. A. B.
Mallalieu, E. L. (Brigg) Roberts, Goronwy (Caernarvonshire) Wilkes, L.
Mallalieu, J. P. W. (Huddersfield, E.) Robertson, J. J. (Berwick) Wilkins, W. A.
Mann, Mrs. Jean Rogers, George (Kensington, N.) Willey, Frederick (Sunderland)
Manuel, A. C. Ross, William Willey, Octavius (Cleveland)
Marquand, Rt. Hon. H. A. Royle, C. Williams, David (Neath)
Mathers, Rt. Hon. G. Shinwell, Rt. Hon. E.
Messer, F. Shurmer, P. L. E. Williams, Rev. Llywelyn (Abertillery)
Middleton, Mrs. L. Silverman, Julius (Erdington) Williams, Ronald (Wigan)
Mikardo, Ian. Silverman, Sydney (Nelson) Williams, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Don V'lly)
Mitchison, G. R. Simmons, C. J. Williams, W. T. (Hammersmith, S.)
Moeran, E. W. Slater, J. Wilson, Rt. Hon. Harold (Huyton)
Monslow, W. Smith, Ellis (Stoke, S.) Winterbottom, Ian (Nottingham, C.)
Moody, A. S. Smith, Norman (Nottingham, S.) Winterbottom, Richard (Brightside)
Morgan, Dr. H. B. Snow, J. W. Wise, F. J.
Morley, R. Sorensen, R. W. Woodburn, Rt. Hon. A.
Morris, Percy (Swansea, W.) Soskice, Rt. Hon. Sir Frank Woods, Rev. G. S.
Mort, D. L. Sparks, J. A. Wyatt, W. L.
Moyle, A. Steele, T. Yates, V. F.
Mulley, F. W. Stewart, Michael (Fulham, E.) Younger, Hon. K.
Murray, J. D. Stokes, Rt. Hon. R. R.
Nally, W. Strachey, Rt. Hon. J. TELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Neal, Harold (Bolsover) Strauss, Rt. Hon. George (Vauxhall) Mr. Bowden and
Noel-Baker, Rt. Hon. P. J. Stross, Dr. Barnett Mr. Kenneth Robinson.
NOES
Aitken, W. T. Braithwaite, Sir Albert (Harrow, W.) Cuthbert, W. N.
Alport, C. J. M. Bromley-Davenport, Lt.-Col. W. Darling, Sir William (Edinburgh, S.)
Amery, Julian (Preston, N.) Brooke, Henry (Hampstead) Davidson, Viscountess
Amory, Heathcoat (Tiverton) Browne, Jack (Govan) Davies, Nigel (Epping)
Arbuthnot, John Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T. de Chair, Somerset
Ashton, H. (Chelmsford) Bullock, Capt. M. De la Bère, R.
Assheton, Rt. Hon. R. (Blackburn, W.) Bullus, Wing Commander E. E. Deedes, W. F.
Astor, Hon. M. L. Burden, F. A. Digby, S. Wingfield
Baker, P. A. D. Butcher, H. W. Dodds-Parker, A. D.
Baldock, Lt.-Cmdr. J. M. Butler, Rt. Hn. R. A. (Saffron Walden) Donner, P. W.
Baldwin, A. E. Carr, Robert (Mitcham) Douglas-Hamilton, Lord Malcolm
Banks, Col. C. Carson, Hon. E. Drayson, G. B.
Baxter, A. B. Channon, H. Dugdale, Maj. Sir Thomas (Richmond)
Beamish, Maj. Tufton Clarke, Col. Ralph (East Grinstead) Duncan, Capt. J. A. L.
Bell, R. M. Clarke, Brig. Terence (Portsmouth, W.) Dunglass, Lord
Bennett, Sir Peter (Edgbaston) Clyde, J. L. Duthie, W. S.
Bennett, Dr. Reginald (Gosport) Colegate, A. Eccles, D. M.
Bennett, William (Woodside) Conant, Maj. R. J. E. Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E.
Bevins, J. R. (Liverpool, Toxteth) Cooper, Sqn. Ldr. Albert (Ilford, S.) Fisher, Nigel
Birch, Nigel Cooper-Key, E. M. Fort, R.
Bishop, F. P. Corbett, Lt.-Col. Uvedale (Ludlow) Foster, John
Black, C. W. Craddock, Beresford (Spelthorne) Fraser, Hon. Hugh (Stone)
Boles, Lt.-Col. D. C. (Wells) Cranborne, Viscount Fraser, Sir Ian (Morecambe & Lonsdale)
Boothby, R. Crookshank, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. F. C. Fyfe, Rt. Hon. Sir David Maxwell
Bossom, A. C. Crosthwaite-Eyre, Col. O. E. Gage, C. H.
Boyle, Sir Edward Crouch, R. F. Galbraith, Cmdr. T. D. (Pollok)
Bracken, Rt. Hon. B. Crowder, Capt. John (Finchley) Galbraith, T. G. D. (Hillhead)
Braine, B. R. Crowder, Petre (Ruislip—Northwood) Gammans, L. D.
Braithwaite, Lt.-Cr. G. (Bristol, N. W.) Cundiff, F. W. Garner-Evans, E. H. (Denbigh)
Gates, Maj. E. E. Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Roper, Sir Harold
Glyn, Sir Ralph Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. O. Russell, R. S.
Gomme-Duncan, Col. A. McAdden, S. J. Ryder, Capt. R. E. D.
Gridley, Sir Arnold McCallum, Major D. Salter, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur
Grimston, Hon. John (St. Albans) McCorquodale, Rt. Hon. M. S. Sandys, Rt. Hon. D.
Grimston, Robert (Westbury) Macdonald, Sir Peter (I. of Wight) Savory, Prof. D. L.
Harden, J. R. E. Mackeson, Brig. H. R. Scott, Donald
Hare, Hon. J. H. (Woodbridge) McKibbin, A. Smiles, Lt.-Col. Sir Walter
Harris, Frederic (Croydon, N.) McKie, J. H. (Galloway) Smithers, Peter (Winchester)
Harris, Reader (Heston) Maclay, Hon. John Smithers, Sir Waldron (Orpington)
Harvey, Air Cdre. A. V. (Macclesfield) Maclean, Fitzroy Smyth, Brig. J. G. (Norwood)
Harvey, Ian (Harrow, E.) MacLeod, Iain (Enfield, W.) Snadden, W. McN.
Harvie-Watt, Sir George MacLeod, John (Ross and Cromarty) Soames, Capt. C.
Hay, John Macmillan, Rt. Hon. Harold (Bromley) Spearman, A. C. M.
Head, Brig. A. H. Macpherson, Major Niall (Dumfries) Spence, H. R. (Aberdeenshire, W.)
Headlam, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon Sir Cuthbert Maitland, Cmdr. J. W. Spens, Sir Patrick (Kensington, S.)
Heard, Lionel Manningham-Buller, R. E. Stanley, Capt. Hon. Richard (N. Fylde)
Heath, Edward Marlowe, A. A. H. Stevens, G. P.
Henderson, John (Cathcart) Marples, A. E. Steward, W. A. (Woolwich, W.)
Hicks-Beach, Maj. W. W. Marshall, Douglas (Bodmin) Stewart, Henderson (Fife, E.)
Higgs, J. M. C. Marshall, Sidney (Sutton) Stoddart-Scott, Col. M.
Hill, Dr. Charles (Luton) Maude, Angus (Ealing S.) Storey, S.
Hill, Mrs. E. (Wythenshawe) Maude, John (Exeter) Strauss, Henry (Norwich, S.)
Hinchingbrooke, Viscount Maudling, R. Stuart, Rt. Hon. James (Moray)
Hirst, Geoffrey Medlicott, Brig. F. Summers, G. S.
Holmes, Sir Stanley (Harwich) Mellor, Sir John Sutcliffe, H.
Hope, Lord John Molson, A. H. E. Taylor, Charles (Eastbourne)
Hopkinson, Henry Monckton, Sir Walter Taylor, William (Bradford, N)
Hornsby-Smith, Miss P. Moore, Lt.-Col. Sir Thomas Teeling, W.
Horsbrugh, Rt. Hon. Florence Morrison, John (Salisbury) Teevan, T. L.
Howard, Gerald (Cambridgeshire) Mott-Radclyffe, C. E. Thomas, J. P. L. (Hereford)
Howard, Greville (St. Ives) Nabarro, G. Thompson, Kenneth Pugh (Walton)
Hudson, Sir Austin (Lewisham, N.) Nicholson, G. Thompson, Lt.-Cmdr. R. (Croydon, W.)
Hudson, Rt. Hon. Robert (Southport) Nield, Basil (Chester) Thorneycroft, Peter (Monmouth)
Hudson, W. R. A. (Hull, N.) Noble, Cmdr. A. H. P. Thornton-Kemsley, Col. C. N.
Hutchinson, Geoffrey (Ilford, N.) Nugent, G. R. H. Thorp, Brig. R. A. F.
Hutchison, Lt.-Com. Clark (E'b'rgh W.) Nutting, Anthony Tilney, John
Hutchison, Col. James (Glasgow) Oakshott, H. D. Touche, G. C.
Hyde, Lt.-Col. H. M. Odey, G. W. Turner, H. F. L.
Hylton-Foster, H. B. O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Sir Hugh Turton, R. H.
Jeffreys, General Sir George Ormsby-Gore, Hon. W. D. Tweedsmuir, Lady
Jennings, R. Orr, Capt. L. P. S. Vane, W. M. F.
Johnson, Howard (Kemptown) Orr-Ewing, Charles Ian (Hendon, N.) Vaughan-Morgan, J. K.
Jones, A. (Hall Green) Orr-Ewing, Ian L. (Weston-super-Mare) Vosper, D. F.
Kaberry, D. Osborne, C. Wade, D. W.
Kerr, H. W. (Cambridge) Peake, Rt. Hon. O. Wakefied, Edward (Derbyshire, W.)
Kingsmill, Lt.-Col. W. H. Perkins, W. R. D. Wakefield, Sir Wavell (Marylebone)
Lambert, Hon. G. Peto, Brig. C. H. M. Walker-Smith, D. C.
Lancaster, Col. C. G. Pickthorn, K. Ward, Hon. George (Worcester)
Langford-Holt, J. Pitman, I. J. Ward, Miss I. (Tynemouth)
Law, Rt. Hon. R. K. Powell, J. Enoch Waterhouse, Capt. Rt. Hon. C.
Leather, E. H. C. Prescott, S. Watkinson, H.
Legge-Bourke, Maj. E. A. H. Price, Henry (Lewisham, W.) Webbe, Sir H. (London & Westminster)
Lennox-Boyd, A. T. Prior-Palmer, Brig. O. White, Baker (Canterbury)
Lindsay, Martin Profumo, J. D. Williams, Charles (Torquay)
Linstead, H. N. Raikes, H. V. Williams, Gerald (Tonbridge)
Llewellyn, D. Rayner, Brig. R. Williams, Sir Herbert (Croydon, E.)
Lloyd, Rt. Hn. Geoffrey (King's N'rt'n) Redmayne, M. Wills, G.
Lloyd, Maj. Guy (Renfrew, E.) Remnant, Hon. P. Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)
Lloyd, Selwyn (Wirral) Renton, D. L. M. Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Lockwood, Lt.-Col. J. C. Roberts, Maj. Peter (Heeley) Wood, Hon. R.
Longden, Gilbert (Herts, S. W.) Robertson, Sir David (Caithness) York, C.
Low, A. R. W. Robinson, Roland (Blackpool, S.)
Lucas, Sir Jocelyn (Portsmouth, S.) Robson-Brown, W. TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Lucas, P. B. (Brentford) Rodgers, John (Sevenoaks) Mr. Studholme and Major Wheatley.

Question put, and agreed to.

Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.