HC Deb 09 February 1953 vol 511 cc62-78
Mr. Lennox-Boyd

I beg to move, in page 8, line 10, at the end, to insert: Any directions of the Minister under this subsection may be absolute or conditional, need not be restricted to individual items of property and may require the Commission to consult the Board and, to such extent if any as may be specified in the directions, to obtain the approval of the Board as to the action to be taken. The purpose of this Amendment is to give effect to an undertaking that I gave on the Committee stage when an Amendment in similar terms was moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Powell). This Amendment seeks to link the Disposal Board with the machinery of disposal even after the assets are disposed of in units and to continue the machinery over the remaining stage when they will be disposed of as chattels. I feel that a very good case was made out for this Amendment in Committee, and I hope that it will be accepted.

Viscount Hinchingbrooke

I think the House will be grateful to my right hon. Friend for moving this Amendment, which is almost identical to the Amendment that was moved during the Committee stage by my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Powell). The main point that he had in mind then was that this Clause not only dealt, as hon. Members opposite seemed to think, with static property, but also might include vehicles. He instanced about 2,000 or 3,000 vehicles in the possession of the Commission which are unserviceable. He went on to say that it would be impracticable to include those unserviceable vehicles in a transport unit which, by the definition of the Bill, is supposed to be a workable business concern. The object of this small and slightly technical Amendment is to enable my right hon. Friend to see that these vehicles which are not included in natural units should be properly disposed of. We are grateful to my right hon. Friend for accepting the Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Herbert Morrison (Lewisham, South)

I beg to move, in page 8, line 27, at the end, to insert: (5) Notwithstanding anything hereinbefore in this Act contained, if any property held by the Commission as part of the existing road haulage undertaking (other than property retained by the Commission under the provisions of subsection (3) of this section) has not been disposed of by the Commission by the end of the year nineteen hundred and fifty-three, the Commission may, if and to the extent that they deem expedient, retain that property instead of disposing of it, and any property that the Commission so retains they shall employ for the purpose of providing directly or indirectly for the public and carrying on such road haulage services by way or carriage of goods for hire or reward as they deem practicable and expedient in the public interest; and for that purpose the Commission may, notwithstanding anything contained in section four of this Act and without obtaining the consent of the Minister in that behalf make over such property or any part thereof and on such terms as the Commission think fit, to any company or companies formed by the Com- mission under or in pursuance of the provisions contained in subsection (1) of the said section, and the Commission may for the purpose aforesaid cause to be incorporated further such companies notwithstanding that the six months referred to in the said subsection or such longer period as the Minister may allow under the provisions of the said subsection, may have expired. This is a very important Amendment, and we have little over half an hour in which to consider it because of the Guillotine. The point of the Amendment is this. The Minister has fairly consistently stated, whether he is right or wrong, that it is desirable that the progress of disposal should be as expeditious as is practicable and reasonable in the circumstances of the case. I follow his argument to the end, because if the road haulage services are to be kept in a state of fluid uncertainty over a period of years it obviously will not be conducive to the maintenance of the proper organisation of the industry.

I believe that if an industry is de-nationalised it is desirable to make it an evolutionary process which is carefully calculated not to create chaos during the period of transition. I think that happened under the nationalisation Acts, because whilst the ownership was transferred, the processes of re-organisation were spread over a period and, indeed, have not been completed yet. I think that that is right.

The problem about de-nationalisation is to secure a similar process. It is not so easy, because under de-nationalisation it is bound to be the case that there is a transfer from a co-ordinated comprehensive ownership which is building up a co-ordinated system, to a situation in which the ownerships are several, multifarious and different, and while I will not say that the risks of disorder, muddle and chaos are necessarily certain, I do say that they are much greater. Indeed, I think it would be fair to say that they are probable unless definite steps are taken to guard against them.

5.0 p.m.

The Minister has said it is desirable that the process of disposal should not be unduly delayed. He holds that it should take place as expeditiously as is practicable. There is force in the argument that in that case we must either let the Disposal Board and the Commission engage in the process of disposal over an unlimited period, with the possibilities of disorder, disorganisation and some degree of chaos, or we can say that when a given date arrives the process of disposal through the Board and the Commission shall come to an end and thereafter the Commission shall become the master of the situation. It should not be prohibited from disposing of the rest, but it should not be obliged to do so.

Thus, the Commission can maintain an ordered and properly supervised system under which the remaining parts of the process can be completed. The Amendment suggests that the operation of the Bill as drafted should obtain until 1st December of this year. That will allow a number of months for the process of disposal to take place. I must make it absolutely clear that we are strongly and definitely opposed to this process. We do not think that disposal ought to take place at all. But we suggest that this process under the Bill if it is not completed by 31st December, 1953, should come to a stop and at that point the Commission should have an option either to dispose of the assets which have not been disposed of or to retain them in its possession as part of a co-ordinated transport system so far as it remains.

That is the proposal in this Amendment. I am pleased to see that in addition to our names, the name of the hon. Baronet the Member for Abingdon (Sir R. Glyn) has been put to this Amendment. It will be interesting to hear his point of view as one with transport experience who sits on the opposite side of the House. Possibly he will approach the subject from a different angle. We think that this proposal is rational and sensible, otherwise we may have an indefinite period of uncertainty and confusion in an industry in which it is undesirable that that should obtain. Our purpose was to build up an ordered and co-ordinated transport system. Although the Government believe in de-nationalisation and in selling off these assets, there is a lot to be said for that being done in a way calculated to produce the minimum of confusion and muddle.

Indeed, that was the basis of the argument we had on Wednesday of last week on an Amendment which we moved and which had some connection with an Amendment moved by hon. Gentlemen opposite. This Amendment deals with the same point about whether we can get an orderly transition, with all the advantages that we can obtain from the British transport system, or whether it should become a confused and somewhat muddled system. I think that I have stated the case for the Amendment. Under the Guillotine, unhappily, and even with the additional day, we have very little time, and I shall content myself with those observations.

Sir Ralph Glyn (Abingdon)

I beg to second the Amendment.

I put my name to this Amendment for reasons which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Lewisham, South (Mr. H. Morrison) has given, and not from any political point of view. I feel that this is necessary in justice to the thousands of men affected by this change. If the process is to be delayed over an unduly long period, we shall upset their feeling of security and, therefore. the efficiency of the service. This Amendment seems to me not unreasonable.

The Minister has met the views expressed during the Committee stage very generously. If he will give a little consideration to this suggestion I think he will see that it falls into line with what he has frequently said himself—that he hopes that the work of the Disposal Board will not be unduly delayed. If we are to believe what we are told, there is such a desire to acquire these vehicles on the part of people who wish to set up their independent concerns again that there will be do doubt at all that the best of the vehicles will be bought within the period suggested. Those that will remain will not be in the same class or category.

There is a great danger in this Disposal Board machinery. When the best vehicles have gone, those left will be deteriorating just at a time when the British motor industry is finding it difficult to sell new vehicles. Therefore, we shall be adding to the hold-up in the production of vehicles by the manufacturers for use in the United Kingdom. It also seems that something else will be a consequence. We shall be increasing very seriously the need for the levy and the period for which that levy will be in operation.

If this Amendment or something like it is accepted I think that the reasons, and causes, for the levy will be reduced, and no one can pretend that the levy is one of the most popular proposals associated with this Bill. There is one other matter which I think is relevant. In connection with the Disposal Board, presumably catalogues will be issued. It will be most difficult to put a value on some of the older vehicles which are cannibalised—bits and pieces of old vehicles put together—and which have a limited life.

I do not think that it is asking much to suggest that the Commission shall continue to hold what is now their property for distribution to the areas, especially in those districts where the transport arrangements are not likely to prove attractive to private enterprise. It seems to me that if this Amendment or something like it could be accepted by the Government it would lead to a reduction of the levy, to greater security for the men, and to a smooth change-over which is most important for the users of transport.

Mr. Arthur Holt (Bolton, West)

I hope that the Minister will not accept this Amendment.

Mr. Ernest Popplewell (Newcastle upon Tyne, West)

More Tory than the Tories.

Mr. H. Morrison

He has got to be: he cannot help it.

Mr. Holt

It may be said that on some of these matters the Tory Party are following the Liberal Party. Once we have set our mind to de-nationalise road transport the plan must go right through. Provisions such as the one proposed might lead the Commission to frustrate the wishes of Parliament. For that reason, I feel that it cannot be accepted by those people who wish to see de-nationalisation go through.

I am a little surprised at the remarks of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Lewisham, South (Mr. H. Morrison), and I feel that he cannot have taken part in the debate on 4th February, because, when his hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, South-East (Mr. Callaghan) was moving an Amendment to encourage the Minister to take longer and longer over this de-nationalisation process, he said this: We do not see any disadvantage in delay; neither do trade and industry. They are interested in preserving the network of services built up. They do not mind whether the process of transferring these from public to private ownership takes nine months or three years. …—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 4th February, 1953; Vol. 510, c. 1884.] Apparently, he uses one argument on one day, and another argument, entirely opposite, on another day.

Mr. H. Morrison

I appreciate the wish of the hon. Member for Bolton, West (Mr. Holt) to help the Conservative Party; he has to do so, because his seat depends on their votes, and it is to be expected that he should be more Tory than the Tories. Has he taken account of the fact that the Minister has urged that this process shall be as rapid as. possible?

Mr. Holt

Certainly, it is to be rapid, but that is no reason why, because of its rapidity, we should have it done chaotically. It may possibly be done with the greatest speed that is conducive to an orderly manner, and I hope the Minister will stick to his intentions on that question.

Mr. David Jones (The Hartlepools)

The hon. Member for Bolton, West (Mr. Holt) is just about as woolly on this subject as, apparently, his leader was on the wireless the other night on the subject of electoral reform, and that is not surprising. He quoted my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, South-East (Mr. Callaghan) without in the least remembering that it was on an entirely different point. What my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff, South-East was arguing was that the physical assets of the Commission should not be disposed of in this way at all, but that a company should be formed and the shares should be disposed of, and, in that event, there was indeed no hurry.

My hon. Friend was strengthened in that argument by the Association of British Chambers of Commerce, which said precisely the same thing. They argued that to disrupt the ordinary commercial channels of this country so far as road transport is concerned would be to injure trade and commerce, and, in the reverse direction, if there is, as the hon. Baronet the Member for Abingdon (Sir R. Glyn) said, this terrific desire on the part of road hauliers to return to this industry, the best parts of the industry ought to be swallowed up in a very short space of time. Indeed, the Minister himself, I think on Second Reading, said that he had very great hopes that these would be disposed of in nine months. After all, there is very little difference between nine months and the period of time which we suggest ought to elapse after the passing of the Bill in order to make the position clear.

The Amendment seeks to place an obligation on the Commission to maintain services available to the public with those parts of their assets that are retained after 31st December, 1953. It may very well be that some of the best paying routes in this country will be taken over. It is true that there is a very lukewarm obligation on the part of the purchasers of these transport units to take over services. They may take them over, but there is no compulsion on their part, and it may very well happen that certain traffic routes up and down the country which are not very remunerative, and, maybe, the actual vehicles, may be withdrawn from the Commission, and there is no obligation imposed by the Minister on the purchasers of transport units to convey that traffic.

It may very well be that, in those circumstances, the Commission would be undertaking these particular jobs with the residue of the vehicles left in their hands. After all, that is not unusual, because there are routes which are now being operated by the Commission, and have been operated for a considerable time, that are not remunerative in themselves, but which are a contribution to an efficient railway service. There may be branch railway lines which have been closed, and in place of which road transport services have been provided. It may very well happen that, in those circumstances, it might be necessary to continue the same service, having regard to all the facts.

5.15 p.m.

There is also the point made by the hon. Baronet about the uncertainty in the minds of the people still engaged in the industry. The Minister, with a great flourish of trumpets a few minutes ago, announced that he was undertaking to make it obligatory on the companies formed by the Commission to insist that the wages and conditions enjoyed by the employees transferred to the companies from the Commission should be not less favourable than those which they now enjoy in the direct employment of the Commission.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

May I correct that, because it is not an exact interpretation of what I said? This is a rather important matter, liable to misunderstanding. What I said was that the men in that part of the national structure where they have been while direct employees of the Commission will remain under that machinery even when they come under the company structure.

Mr. Jones

Inferentially, that means that, if they remain under that machinery, they must have applied to them the terms and conditions laid down by that machinery. That follows. Therefore, it means that the companies which are formed by the Commission must give to their employees not less favourable terms than those they now enjoy under the direct employment of the Commission, but the Minister has not imposed that obligation on the purchasers of transport units. Not only will the residue of the employees of British Road Services be placed in an almost impossible position, but their best routes will be gone and their best vehicles will be gone, and they will be left with the rough.

This must apparently go on, even if we are to listen to the advice of the hon. Member for Bolton, West, and it will never come to an end. Surely, in the interests of commerce and industry, in the interests of fair play and commonsense, a final date for the machinations of the Disposal Board ought to be stated in the Bill?

Mr. Gerald Nabarro (Kidderminster)

If there is any vested merit in this proposal from the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Lewisham, South (Mr. H. Morrison) it is rather an abstract merit, in that it underlines the necessity for a correct interpretation of the word "operable" in the phrase operable unit. Every speaker following the right hon. Gentleman has taken the view that the sale of these vehicles by the Disposal Board will necessarily result in all the good vehicles going first and all the rest being left to the last. I do not believe that that is so. If these vehicles are sold as operable units, each unit disposed of should comprise good vehicles, indifferent vehicles and a few bad vehicles, or vehicles becoming obsolescent.

The right hon. Gentleman referred to "disorder" and "disorganisation." That is as much wishful thinking as his claims about his transport protest meetings up and down the country which have been such a disgraceful flop. I have no doubt that within a couple of years the whole of the vehicles will be disposed of, and that what the right hon. Gentleman has said will be demonstrated as being nothing more than a Socialist hallucination. I am compelled to close now because my right hon. Friend wants to reply, but I hope he will reject the Amendment.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

I must apologise to my hon. Friend; I thought he moved forward to emphasise a point and would then sit down. I apologise for mistaking the physical movement he made.

I do not think the right hon. Member for Lewisham, South (Mr. H. Morrison) really expects me to accept this Amendment, nor do I think he feels much confidence that I will do so even with the added bait thrown in in the form of the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Abingdon (Sir R. Glyn). Incidentally, I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for the tribute he paid me personally, and I hope that the Labour Party publicity experts will give the same world-wide circulation to it as they have given to certain other observations of my hon. Friend.

I agree with the hon. Member for Bolton, West (Mr. Holt) that to accept this Amendment would be to frustrate one of the main purposes of the Bill, and I must congratulate him on having been able to unearth, with the attenuated resources which a small party is bound to have, the wholly apposite quotation of the right hon. Member for Lewisham, South which was quite incompatible with the point of view he expressed today. This Amendment would allow the British Transport Commission to retain after the end of 1953, without the approval of the Disposal Board, anything not disposed of by the end of 1953.

The Amendment must be read in conjunction with that to the third line of Clause 1, which was in the names of some of the same hon. Gentlemen, and which proposed that the words "as quickly as is reasonably practicable" should be omitted from the Bill. We cannot lose sight of the fact that the same hon. Gentlemen are interested in both Amendments.

I said in an earlier discussion that I hoped the disposal machinery might have finished its work by the end of 1953. I must say I was very optimistic in making that observation, but we all learn by events, and I would not repeat the same phrase now. I am anxious to introduce an element of decent speed without the risks which the right hon. Gentleman advanced, but certainly no panic speed, and I stick to the conclusion at which we arrived that "as quickly as is reasonably practicable" is the proper criterion.

Let us consider what would be the result if this Amendment were accepted. It would leave entirely to the discretion of the Commission what vehicles they were to retain after the end of 1953. I think this is asking too much of the Commission, even though I have never suggested that they would not do their utmost to fulfil the intention of Parliament. They could continue to run vehicles directly or they could augment the fleets of the companies under Clause 4, or set up additional companies for this purpose.

The object of this Amendment—and I do not think my hon. Friend the Member for Abingdon has wholly apprehended it—would be to threaten the disposal machinery with a rush, the very opposite of what we are all anxious to achieve. I cannot believe it would be of much value to the Commission after the better assets had been disposed of to retain the less good assets. Then after the end of 1954, when there would be no 25-mile limit, they would be subject to the steady erosion by wholly free private fleets all over the United Kingdom.

For these reasons—and I seem to have completed the reasons quicker than I thought I should—I must ask the House not to accept the Amendment. I now leave it to an hon. Member opposite to get up indignantly two minutes before half-past five to say that they have not had enough time in which to discuss the matter.

Mr. Callaghan

I did not intend to say that. I intended to say that the Minister had given completely and wholly inade- quate reasons for rejecting the Amendment, and that it was quite clear that he was very fortunate that we had had only half an hour in which to discuss this particular Amendment because had we had longer he would have been in greater difficulty than he obviously was in trying to find coherent and adequate reasons for opposing the arguments adduced by my right hon. Friend.

It seems to us that as we allowed two Amendments to pass without any discussion at all, the Minister has treated this Amendment with less than the customary examination we would have expected from him, because he has himself admitted that he departs from the original argument he put forward when we were first considering the matter. He has admitted that his original expectation was that the vehicles would be disposed of in a matter of nine months, and, assuming that the Bill became law, that would mean that the disposal, according to his original estimate, would take place by the end of 1953.

The right hon. Gentleman now tells us that he has rejected that particular approach and prefers to rely on the words which I think are to be found in Clause I that the vehicles shall be disposed of "as quickly as is reasonably practicable." But when my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, West (Mr. Popplewell) asked what was meant by that, he was told that the Minister had no time to tell him, although he sat down five minutes before the expiration of the time.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

We had a long debate on the words "as quickly as is reasonably practicable," and the hon. Gentleman himself on three occasions misquoted it as "as reasonable as possible." I made a lengthy speech on that occasion which I would be quite prepared to reproduce now if this were not the Report stage and but for the fact that colleagues on both sides of the House would find it tedious.

Mr. Callaghan

If the right hon. Gentleman is going to interrupt, I would he obliged if he would get the alleged quotation accurate. I did not use the words he put into my mouth. He will recall that the debate which we had on the question of what was reasonably practicable was the same debate in which he expressed the view that disposal would be completed in a period of nine months. Therefore, the answer to the question what was reasonably practicable, was, in these circumstances, his view that nine months was to be the period.

The right hon. Gentleman now tells us that he has departed from that view. He is learning as he goes along, and it is not for us to take advantage of that situation. But what we must all regret is that the country's situation is going to suffer because the Minister is learning too late. I am quite sure that had this Clause been produced today instead of six months ago it would have a very different shape from what it has. Indeed, that is quite clear from the fact that the Minister is going to introduce substantial Amendments to it when it gets to the other place.

The plain truth is that the Government have botched the whole of this procedure. It is obvious that they had no idea of the difficulties involved, because the Minister, who is supposed to be a responsible man, first tells us that he expects to get the matter through in nine months, and, before any further stage takes place, says it will take longer—an indefinite period.

Mr. Lennox-Boyd

No. I want to correct what the hon. Gentleman has said.

Mr. Callaghan

In that case, I have no time in which to give way. The Minister has misquoted me once. [HON. MEMBERS: "Shame."] I can assure hon. Gentleman opposite that I shall not allow them to shout me down. They might at least have the courtesy to behave properly when we on this side of the House are being guillotined by their actions. The plain truth is that the Minister knows as well as we all know that these vehicles are not going to be disposed of in the manner he originally proposed. He knows, and everybody opposite knows, that these vehicles cannot be disposed of in a proper, orderly way in order to recover the price that was paid for them, and yet he insists on rushing ahead in this mad way.

It being Half-past Five o'Clock, Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER proceeded, pursuant to Orders, to put forthwith Me Question already proposed from the Chair.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 206; Noes, 241.

Division No. 77.] AYES [5.30 p.m.
Acland, Sir Richard Grenfell, Rt. Hon. D. R. Paton, J
Albu, A. H. Griffiths, David (Rother Valley) Pearson, A.
Allen, Arthur (Bosworth) Griffiths, Rt. Hon. James (Llanelly) Plummer, Sir Leslie
Allen, Scholefield (Crewe) Griffiths, William (Exchange) Popplewell, E.
Anderson, Frank (Whitehaven) Hale, Leslie (Oldham, W.) Porter, G.
Ba[...]on, Miss Alice Hall, Rt. Hon. Glenvil (Colne Valley) Price, Joseph T. (Westhoughton)
Balfour, A. Hall, John T. (Gateshead, W.) Proctor, W. T.
Bartley, P. Hardy, E. A. Pursey, Cmdr. H.
Bence, C. R. Hargreaves, A. Reeves, J.
Benn, Wedgwood Harrison, J. (Nottingham, E.) Reid, Thomas (Swindon)
Benson, G. Hastings, S. Reid, William (Camiachie)
Beswick, F. Healey, Denis (Leeds, S.E.) Rhodes, H.
Blackburn, F. Herbison, Miss M. Robens, Rt. Hon. A
Blenkinsop, A. Hobson, C. R. Roberts, Albert (Nermanton)
Blyton, W. R. Holman, P. Robinson, Kenneth (St. Pan[...]ras, N.)
Boardman, H. Holmes, Horace (Hemsworth) Rogers, George (Kensington, N.)
Bowden, H. W. Houghton, Douglas Ross, William
Bowles, F. G. Hudson, James (Ealing, N.) Shackleton, E. A. A.
Braddock, Mrs. Elizabeth Hughes, Emrys (S. Ayrshire) Shinwell, Rt. Hon. E.
Brockway, A. F. Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.) Short, E. W.
Brook, Dryden (Halifax) Hynd, H. (Accrington) Shurmer, P. L. E.
Broughton, Dr. A. D. D. Hynd, J. B. (Attercliffe) Silverman, Julius (Erdington)
Brown, Thomas (Ince) Irvine, A. J. (Edge Hill) Silverman, Sydney (Nelson)
Burton, Miss F. E. Irving, W. J. (Wood Green) Simmons, C. J. (Brierley Hill)
Butler, Herbert (Hackney, S.) Isaacs, Rt. Hon. G. A. Slater, J.
Callaghan, L. J. Janner, B. Smith, Ellis (Stoke, S.)
Castle, Mrs. B. A. Jay, Rt. Hon. D. P. T. Smith, Norman (Nottingham, S.)
Champion, A. J. Jeger, George (Goole) Snow, J. W.
Chapman, W. D. Jenkins, R. H. (Stechford) Sorensen, R. W.
Chetwynd, G. R. Johnson, James (Rugby) Soskice, Rt. Hon. Sir Frank
Clunie, J. Jones, David (Hartlepool) Sparks, J. A
Collick, P. H. Jones, Jack (Rotherham) Steele, T.
Corbet, Mrs. Freda K[...]enan, W. Strachey, Rt. Hon. J.
Cove, W. G. Key, Rt. Hon. C. W Strauss, Rt. Hon. George (Vauxhall)
Craddock, George (Bradford, S.) King, Dr. H. M. Summerskili, Rt. Hon. E.
Crosland, C. A. R. Kinky, J. Swingler, S. T.
Grossman, R. H. S. Lee, Frederick (Newton) Sylvester, G. O.
Cullen, Mrs. A. Lever, Leslie (Ardwick) Taylor, Bernard (Mansfield)
Dairies, P. Lewis, Arthur Taylor, John (West Lothian)
Dalton, Rt. Hon. H. Lipton, Lt.-Col. M. Taylor, Rt. Hon. Robert (Morpeth)
Darling, George (Hillsborough) MacColl, J. E. Thomas, David (Aberdare)
Davies, Ernest (Enfield, E.) McGovern, J. Thomas, Ivor Owen (Wrekin)
Davies, Stephen (Merthyr) McInnes, J. Thorneycroft, Harry (Clayton)
Deer, G. McLeavy, F. Thurtle, Ernest
Delargy, H. J. MacMillan, M. K. (Western Isles) Tomney, F.
Dodds, N. N. Ma[...]Pherson, Malcolm (Stirling) Turner-Samuels, M.
Donnelly, D. L. Mainwaring, W. H. Ungoed-Thomas, Sir Lynn
Dugdale, Rt. Hon. John (W. Bromwich) Mallalieu, E. L. (Brigg) Viant, S. P.
Ede, Rt. Hon. J. C. Mallalffiu, J. P. W. (Huddersfield, E.) Wallace, H. W.
Edelman, M. Manuel, A. C. Weitzman, D.
Edwards, John (Brighouse) Mayhew, C. P. Wells, Percy (Faversham)
Edwards W. J. (Stepney) Mellish, R. J. Wells, William (Walsall)
Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W.) Messer, F. West, D. G.
Evans, Edward (Lowestoft) Mikardo, Ian Wheeldon, W. E.
Evans, Stanley (Wednesbury) Mitchison, G. R. White, Mrs. Eirene (E. Flint)
Fernyhough, E. Moody, A. S. White, Henry (Derbyshire, N.E.)
Fienburgh, W. Morley, R. Whiteley, Rt. Hon. W.
Finch, H. J. Morris, Percy (Swansea, W.) Wigg, George
Fletcher, Eric (Islington, E.) Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Lewisham, S.) Williams, Rev. Llywelyn (Abertillery)
Follick, M. Moyle, A. Williams, Ronald (Wigan)
Foot, M. M. Mulley, F. W. Wilson, Rt. Hon. Harold (Huyton)
Forman, J. C. Nally, W. Winterbottom, Richard (Brightside)
Fraser, Thomas (Hamilton) Neal, Harold (Bolsover) Woodburn, Rt. Hon. A.
Freeman, John (Watford) Oliver, G. H. Wyatt, W. L.
Gaitskell, Rt. Hon. H. T. N. Orbach, M. Yates, V. F.
Gibson, C. W. Oswald, T. Younger, Rt. Hon K
Glanville, James Paget, R. T.
Gordon Walker, Rt. Hon. P. C. Paling, Rt. Hon. W. (Dearne Valley) TELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Greenwood, Anthony (Rossendale) Pannell, Charles Mr. Wilkins and Mr. Hannan.
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Arthur (Wakefield) Pargiter. G. A.
NOES
Aitken, W. T. Arbuthnot, John Banks, Col. C.
Allan, R. A. (Paddington, S.) Ashton, H. (Chelmsford) Barber, Anthony
Alport, C. J. M. Assheton, Rt. Hon. R. (Blackburn, W.) Baxter, A. B.
Amery, Julian (Preston, N.) Astor, Hon. J. J. Beach, Maj. Hicks
Amory, Heathcoat (Tiverton) Baldock, Lt.-Cmdr. J. M. Beamish, Maj. Tufton
A[...]truther-Gray, Major W. J. Baldwin, A. E. Bell, Ronald (Bucks, S.)
Bennett, Dr. Reginald (Gosport) Harris, Reader (Heston) Noble, Cmdr. A. H. P
Bevins, J. R. (Toxteth) Harrison, Col. J. H. (Eye) Nugent, G. R. H.
Birch, Nigel Harvey, Air Cdre A. V. (Macclesfield) Nutting, Anthony
Bishop, F. P. Harvey, Ian (Harrow, E.) Odey, G. W.
Bossom, A. C. Harvie-Watt, Sir George Ormsby-Gore, Hon. W. D.
Bowen, E. R Hay, John Orr, Capt. L. P. S.
Boyd-Carpenter, J. A. Heald, Sir Lionel Orr-Ewing, Charles Ian (Hendon, N.)
Boyle, Sir Edward Heath, Edward Osborne, C.
Braise, B. R. Higgs, J. M. C. Peto, Brig. C. H. M.
Braithwaite, Sir Albert (Harrow, W.) Hill, Dr. Charles (Luton) Peyton, J. W. W.
Braithwaite, Lt.-Cdr. G. (Bristol, N.W.) Hill, Mrs. E. (Wylhenshawe) Pi[...]kthorn, K. W. M
Bromley-Davenport, Lt.-Col. W. H. Hinchingbrooke, Viscount Pilkington, Capt. R A
Brooke, Henry (Hampstead) Hirst, Geoffrey Pitman, I. J.
Browne, Jack (Govan) Holland-Martin, C. J Powell, J. Enoch
Buchan-Hepburn, Rt. Hon. P. G. T. Hollis, M. C. Price, Henry (Lewisham W.)
Bullard, D. G. Holt, A. F. Prior-Palmer, Brig. O. L
Bullock, Capt. M. Hopkinson, Rt. Hon. Henry Profumo, J. D.
Bullus, Wing Commander E. E Hornsby-Smith, Miss M. P. Raikes, Sir Victor
Burden, F. F. A. Horobin, I. M. Redmayne, M.
Butcher, Sir Herbert Horsbrugh, Rt. Hon. Florence Remnant, Hon. P.
Butler, Rt. Hon. R. A. (Saffron Walden) Hudson, Sir Austin (Lewisham, N.) Renton, D. L. M.
Campbell, Sir David Hudson, W. R. A. (Hull, N.) Roberts, Peter (Heeley)
Carr, Robert Hurd, A. R. Robertson, Sir David
Carson, Hon. E. Hutchison, Lt.-Com. Clark (E'b'rgh W.) Robinson, Roland (Blackpool, S.)
Cary, Sir Robert Hutchison, James (Scotstoun) Rodgers, John (Sevenoaks)
Channon, H. Hyde, Lt.-Col. H. M. Roper, Sir Harold
Churchill, Rt. Hon. W. S. Hylton-Foster, H. B. H. Ropner, Col. Sir Leonard
Clarke, Col. Ralph (East Grinstead) Jenkins, Robert (Dulwich) Russell, R. S.
Clarke, Brig. Terence (Portsmouth, W.) Johnson, Eric (Blackley) Ryder, Capt. R. E. D.
Cole, Norman Johnson, Howard (Kemptown) Sandys, Rt. Hon. D.
Colegate, W. A. Jones, A. (Hall Green) Savory, Prof. Sir Douglas
Conant, Maj. R. J. E. Kaberry, D. Schofield, Lt.-Col. W. (Rochdale)
Cooper, Sqn. Ldr. Albert Keeling, Sir Edward Scott, R. Donald
Craddock, Beresford (Spelthorne) Kerr, H. W. Scott-Miller, Cmdr. R.
Cranborne, Viscount Lambert, Hon. G. Shepherd, William
Crookshank, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. F. C. Lancaster, Col. C. G. Simon, J. E. S. (Middlesbrough, W.)
Crosthwaite-Eyre, Col. O. E. Langford-Holt, J. A Smithers, Sir Waldron (Orpington)
Crouch, R. F. Law, Rt. Hon. R. K Smyth, Brig. J. G. (Norwood)
Crowder, Sir John (Finchley) Leathor, E. H. C. Soames, Capt. C.
Crowder, Petre (Ruislip—Northwood) Legge-Bourke, Maj. E. A. H. Spearman, A. C. M.
Cuthbert, W. N. Legh, P. R. (Petersfield) Speir, R. M.
Darling, Sir William (Edinburgh, S.) Lennox-Boyd, Rt. Hon. A. T Spans, Sir Patrick (Kensington, S.)
Davidson, Viscountess Linslead, H. N. Stanley, Capt. Hon. Richard
Davies, Rt. Hn. Clement (Montgomery) Llewellyn, D. T. Stevens, G. P.
Deedes, W. F. Lloyd, Rt. Hon. G. (King's Norton) Stewart, Henderson (Fife, E.)
Digby, S. Wingfield Lloyd, Rt. Hon. Selwyn (Wirral) Storey, S.
Dodds-Parker, A. D. Lockwood, Lt.-Col. J. C. Strauss, Henry (Norwich, S.)
Donaldson, Cmdr. C. E. McA. Low, A. R. W. Stuart, Rt. Hon. James (Moray)
Donner, P. W. Lucas, Sir Jocelyn (Portsmouth, S.) Teeling, W.
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord Malcolm Lucas, P. B. (Brantford) Thomas, P. J. M. (Conway)
Drayson, G. B. Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Thompson, Kenneth (Walton)
Draws, C. Lyttelton, Rt. Hon. O. Tilney, John
Duncan, Capt. J. A. L. M[...]Adden, S. J. Touche, Sir Gordon
Duthie, W. S Macdonald, Sir Peter Turner, H. F. L.
Elliot, Rt. Hon. W. E McKie, J. H. (Galloway) Turton, R. H.
Fell, A Maclay, Rt. Hon. John Vosper, D. F.
Finlay, Graeme Maclean, Fitzroy Wakefield, Edward (Derbyshire, W.)
Fisher, Nigel Macleod, Rt. Hon. lain (Enfield, W.) Wakefield, Sir Wavell (St. Marylebone)
Fleetwood-Hesketh, R F. MacLeod, John (Ross and Cromarty) Walker-Smith, D. C.
Fletcher-Cooke, C. Macpherson, Niall (Dumfries) Ward, Hon. George (Worcester)
Fort, R. Maitland, Patrick (Lanark) Ward, Miss I. (Tynemouth)
Foster, John Manningham-Buller, Sir R. E. Waterhouse, Capt. Rt. Hon. C
Fraser, Sir Ian (Morecambe & Lonsdale) Markham, Major S. F. Watkinson, H. A.
Fyfe, Rt. Hon. Sir David Maxwell Marlowe, A. A. H. Webbe, Sir H. (London & Westminster)
Galbraith, Rt. Hon. T. D. (Pollok) Marples, A. E. Wellwood, W.
Galbraith, T. G. D. (Hillhead) Maude, Angus Williams, Rt. Hon. Charles (Torquay)
Garner-Evans, E. H. Medlicott, Brig. F Williams, Gerald (Tonbridge)
George, Rt. Hon. Maj. G. Lloyd Mellor, Sir John Williams, Sir Herbert (Croydon, E.)
Godber, J. B. Molson, A. H. E. Williams, R. Dudley (Exeter)
Gomme-Duncan, Col. A. Moore, Lt.-Col. Sir Thomas Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)
Gower, H. R. Mott-Radclyffe, C. E. Wood, Hon. R.
Graham, Sir Fergus Nabarro, G. D. N.
Grlmston, Hon. John (St. Albans) Nicholls, Harmar TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Hall, John (Wycombe) Nicholson, Godfrey (Farnham) Mr. Richard Thompson and
Hare, John J. H. Nicolson, Nigel (Bournemouth, E.) Mr. Wills.
Harris, Frederic (Croydon, N.) Nield, Basil (Chester)