HC Deb 05 March 1951 vol 485 cc41-2
Mr. Boyd-Carpenter (Kingston-upon-Thames)

I beg to move, in page 6, line 29, at the end to insert: Provided also that no person shall be convicted of an offence under this subsection unless the court is satisfied that the notice served on him under subsection (1) of this section was served at such time before the date specified therein as to allow the person upon whom it was served reasonable time to comply with the said notice having regard to all the circumstances of the case. This Amendment follows, as the House will recall, a discussion in Committee on the point whether it was not possible under the Clause, as it now stands, for a man to be subjected to the criminal penalties under the Clause even if he had not in fact had enough time to comply with the notice. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Labour will recall that, after some discussion, an Amendment was withdrawn with a view to finding some possible solution. The present Amendment does not go so far as the one moved in Committee. It imposes no limit of time during which the notice has to be given, and thereby meets the point which the Parliamentary Secretary made on Committee stage, but it provides that if, in the opinion of the court, the notice given was not adequate, no conviction shall take place. It is designed to prevent the possibility of an injuctice in this way being done to the man.

I understand that the Government took the view that this Amendment would be more appropriately placed on line 29 and not line 23 as it appears on the Paper. Having considered that, I am inclined respectfully to agree with them, and I hope that no dispute will arise on that point. Perhaps I may be permitted to move the Amendment in relation to line 29 in view of the Government's suggestion that that is the right place for it, with which I agree.

Mr. A. J. Irvine (Liverpool, Edge Hill)

I hope that the Government will look kindly at this Amendment because it seems to me to be good sense. The existing proviso says that if it is impossible for a man to comply, it shall not be an offence if he fails to comply. That seems to be giving nothing away at all. The Amendment does give the reservist something which is worth having which is not included in the Bill as it stands. Without such a provison as this, it seems to me that a court might feel bound to convict in circumstances where it was possible to comply but to comply would cause serious hardship to the reservist because of the shortness of the notice. I hope, therefore, that the Government will see their way to accept the Amendment.

Mr. Stewart

We thought that the original proviso in the Bill adequately safeguarded against any injustice being done. We must, however, have regard to the arguments advanced by the hon. Member for Kingston-upon-Thames (Mr. Boyd-Carpenter) and my hon. Friend the Member for Edge Hill (Mr. Irvine), and we shall be very glad to accept the Amendment.

Mr. Manningham-Buller

I rise to say "Thank you" to right hon. Gentlemen and hon. Gentlemen opposite for accepting the suggestion put forward from these benches, which makes another improvement in the Bill.

Amendment agreed to.