HC Deb 06 March 1956 vol 549 cc2051-68

Considered in Committee under Standing Order No. 84 (Money Committees).—[Queen's Recommendation signified.]

[Sir CHARLES MACANDREW in the Chair]

10.12 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Education (Mr. Dennis Vosper)

I beg to move, That, for the purposes of any Act of the present Session to amend the Teachers (Superannuation) Acts, 1918 to 1946, and so much of the Education (Scotland) Acts, 1939 to 1953, as relates to superannuation and to the employment of teachers over the age of sixty-five years, and for purposes connected therewith, it is expedient to authorise the payment out of moneys provided by Parliament of any sums authorised or required to be so paid by virtue of any provisions of the said Act of the present Session (including any increase attributable thereto in the sums payable out of such moneys under any other enactment) being provisions—

  1. (a) for the restoration to teachers as from the commencement of the said Act of annual superannuation allowances previously terminated by reason of the re-employment of those teachers in contributory service or in employment which would apart from their age be contributory service, and the continued payment of annual superannuation allowances to teachers who, having been granted such allowances, are at that date or thereafter become re-employed as aforesaid;
  2. (b) for the repayment to teachers who, having been granted a superannuation allowance or gratuity, are at any time re-employed in contributory service, but do not qualify by virtue of their re-employment for any further allowance or gratuity, of contributions paid by them in respect of any period of re-employment after the commencement of the said Act;
  3. (c) amending the law as to the intervals at which instalments of annuities and annual allowances may be paid.
  4. (d) enabling the Minister to treat as contributory service for the purpose of calculating the amounts of allowances or gratuities of teachers employed in contributory service previous employment providing experience of value to them as teachers, being employment in respect of which contributions of such amount as the Minister may prescribe are paid by the teachers.
As this is the Teachers (Superannuation) [Money] (No. 2) Resolution, I think it would be the wish of the Committee that I should say a brief word or two in explanation. Some hon. Members will remember that during the debate on the No. 1 Resolution I said that whilst matters which were not matters of principle in the Bill could not be covered by that Money Resolution, my right hon. Friend would not hesitate to introduce a further Resolution if a solution to those problems became possible. This Resolution follows up that statement.

In particular, on that occasion I had in mind the question of monthly payments, and the Resolution enables monthly payments to be made. This is an additional Money Resolution; it in no way amends the No. 1 Resolution or affects the provisions of that Resolution.

Paragraph (a) authorises a new Clause which will enable a teacher re-employed in contributory service at a salary lower than that which he previously enjoyed before retirement to make up the difference by drawing pension. Paragraph (b) will enable provision to be made for the refund of contributions to a teacher reemployed in service but who does not complete the 12 months necessary for his pension to be re-assessed. Paragraph (c) is self-explanatory and covers monthly payments and also deferred annuities under the Act of 1898. Paragraph (d) is a recent addition to the Order Paper. I apologise for that, but I think it will be welcome. It will enable provision to be made for the discussion of the principle of buying in previous service by teachers who have served in previous employment providing experience of value to them as teachers.

I repeat that my right hon. Friend and I anticipated both in the No. 1 Resolution and in Committee upstairs that if it were possible to solve some of the problems we had in mind this second Resolution would be introduced. I hope that the Committee will therefore agree to it and also regard it as some indication of my right hon. Friend's desire to help the Committee and the teachers wherever it is reasonably possible.

10.15 p.m.

Mr. Michael Stewart (Fulham)

We must congratulate the Government on having produced what I may call the midday edition of the second Money Resolution. I have among the papers issued for the guidance of hon. Members one dated 6th December. It contains extensive Money Resolutions to the Teachers Bill. I have one dated 29th February. which contains a second Money Resolution, and one dated 6th March. which contains yet a second draft of a second Money Resolution.

We should be the last to complain of this patient if somewhat erratic advance of the Government to something approaching a state of grace. The Government must feel themselves fortunate that they were not able to carry through the House the Bill which they had originally intended. It has been surprising, as the discussions in the Standing Committee have continued, how many things which at the outset were, in the Government's view, irrelevant, outside the scope of the Bill, impossible, or unreasonable, have now come within the scope of the Bill. The Parliamentary Secretary hoped that this Money Resolution would be taken as evidence of the Minister's desire to help the Committee and the teachers, wherever reasonably possible. The longer we go on with the Bill the more elastic we hope to see the Minister's idea of what is reasonably possible. We would like to see the stretching process continued as long as possible.

Although we welcome every paragraph in the Money Resolution, we still feel there should be a further extension of it by the addition of new paragraphs, perhaps at the rate of one a week, if the Government cannot manage it more rapidly than that. As far as I can see, there is nothing in the Money Resolution which would make it easier for the Committee to discuss one of the most serious deficiencies in the Bill, the lack of proper provision for widows, orphans, and dependants of teachers. I believe I am correct in saying that the fact that no such thing is mentioned explicitly in the Money Resolution does not lead us inevitably to the conclusion that it will be impossible to discuss it on Report. Even on the earlier Money Resolution a discussion on that matter took place in one of the two Standing Committees to which the Bill, so remarkable in its general procedure and handling, was committed.

We shall hope that in due course it will be considered, and that there will be an Amendment which can be examined in one of the Standing Committees and which will have an opportunity of further consideration on Report. I regret that the Government did not have it in mind to make that explicitly possible by the addition of another paragraph to this No. 2 Money Resolution.

There is also still waiting on the Order Paper for Report an Amendment dealing with the position of young men who first do their National Service and then enter the teaching profession. It is a matter for regret that the Money Resolution does not make it clear beyond doubt that an Amendment dealing with that matter will be in order under the Money Resolution, though, again, I would say that that does not necessarily dispose of the question whether such an Amendment will be in order or not.

There are also Amendments in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Central (Mr. Short) which deal with the position of part-time teachers, a matter to which I ventured to make reference in the Second Reading debate as long ago as 6th December.

These three matters—and indeed there are others—have not yet thrust themselves sufficiently far into the Minister's concept of what is reasonable for the green light to be given to them explicitly in the Money Resolution, but of course with the pressure of other business the Report and Third Reading stages of the Bill is to take place rather later than had previously been expected. There is, therefore, time for further volumes of this Money Resolution to appear, and we shall accord any additions as cordial a welcome as we accord the partial advance towards grace which the present Money Resolution represents.

Mr. George Thomas (Cardiff, West)

Like my hon. Friend the Member for Fulham (Mr. M. Stewart), I am glad that the Minister has had further thoughts about the Money Resolution. We have had a lot of chopping and changing in connection with the Teachers (Superannuation) Bill and the money provisions. We found in Committee that the previous Money Resolution was narrow and rigid and made it impossible even for the Minister to go as far as he wished to go in response to the representations of Members of the Committee.

This Money Resolution is being viewed with great interest by the teaching profession. I have never known teachers to be as angry and frustrated as they are at present. The fact that the Committee stage of the Teachers (Superannuation) Bill leaves teachers still under the obligation to make increased contributions has given us an indignant and an angry profession. This Resolution will make it easier for certain of the concessions which the profession has sought to be granted. I am glad that the Minister is making it possible for pensions to be paid monthly instead of quarterly. Previously he told us that that was quite impossible, and I am glad that the impossible has now become the possible.

It is wonderful how, with the passing of time, that which has been refused by successive Ministers through the years—not only by the present Minister but by successive Ministers through the years—is at last found to be possible. I understand that the cost of this part is likely to be £40,000 a year—the Minister made that statement in Committee. It is a small cost in view of the additional benefits and relief which it will give to pensioners. Their pension is already small enough without their having to stretch it out over a long period.

I now want to ask whether this Money Resolution will make it possible for the Minister on Report to implement the promise given in Committee as regards teachers who have suffered from tuberculosis, and who, at present, are allowed a year's leave of absence from school. The Amendment which was proposed in my name—and which I understood the Parliamentary Secretary to accept—would make it clear that those teachers would be entitled to 18 months' leave of absence instead of a year. I shall be very glad to have an assurance on that point.

I was particularly interested in what the Parliamentary Secretary had to say about paragraph (d) of the Money Resolution. Will that enable the Minister to take military service into account and allow a young man who does his two years' service to buy his way into the profession? It is a monstrous injustice that young men who are conscripted to the service of the country should be at a disadvantage for pension purposes because they have served the nation.

Mr. F. Blackburn (Stalybridge and Hyde)

Would not my hon. Friend agree that it would also be an injustice if they had to buy in their service?

Mr. Thomas

No, I do not think it would be an injustice to buy in their service through a contributory scheme. I think we have to be reasonable in the demands we make; but the Treasury ought to make the employers' contribution to the Fund in this case.

I should like to know whether the Minister is leaving the door open through paragraph (d) for the men teachers to have what is their rightful due; otherwise, if this Resolution is not drawn widely enough, the right hon. Gentleman will leave a festering sore which will cause ill-feeling through the coming years and bitterness amongst the men teachers in the country. Since equal pay has been granted, the provision in this case to cover National Service becomes all the more important.

Under the terms of the Bill, it is possible for a teacher to count up to 45 years of service for superannuation purposes, and I want to know whether under paragraph (d) the men will be placed on an equal basis with women so that they may be able to count 45 years, if they so desire. There is one other point to which I want to refer. It has been my privilege to address a large number of teachers' meetings during the past month, and, looking at this Money Resolution, I am bearing in mind the main demands which teachers are making at the present time.

Clause 8 of the Bill is a pitiful substitute for a widows', orphans' and dependants' pensions scheme. It is quite inadequate to meet the demands of the profession, and I want to know whether the Minister, who obviously never regards any words as the last words, and who makes me wonder whether he is going to change his last word from "Yea" into "Nay," will promise that, if this Money Resolution does not—

Mr. Ede (South Shields)

Second edition.

The Minister of Education (Sir David Eccles)

Final night.

Mr. Thomas

—does not cover the provision—I should hate to think that this was the final night. There is another night coming, I respectfully inform the Minister, but I will leave the matter there.

Will the Minister give us an assurance that the door is not closed through this Money Resolution to a widows' and orphans' contributory scheme being considered for the teaching profession? It would be unfortunate if this Resolution were to be accepted by the House and served merely to accentuate the bitterness which prevails in the profession at present. For all these privileges and advantages we are grateful, but it would be misleading to pretend to the Minister or the House that the right hon. Gentleman has gone one quarter of the way which the teaching profession wanted him to go to meet them on this important question.

The Minister has a great chance with this Money Resolution to make up for some of the ground lost during the past months in regard to the relationship between the Ministry of Education and the teaching profession. Will this Money Resolution help to make this relationship better? I have never known it to be so strained as it is at present. If this Resolution could go a little way towards improving this relationship, it would help the education service, but I fear that it is not one which is likely to heal the wounds that have been opened by the Minister during the progress of the Bill and by the Bill itself.

I shall support the Money Resolution, because it includes things that we desire, because it includes steps that have been promised by the Minister, but I regret that it does not go far enough to meet the reasonable requests which the teaching profession has made time and time again to the Minister of Education.

10.30 p.m.

Dr. Horace King (Southampton, Itchen)

It would be ungracious not to welcome paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) of this Money Resolution, by which the Minister makes quite useful concessions to the teaching profession—concessions some of which have been asked for quite a long time; but if it would be ungracious not to pay tribute to the Minister, it would be excessive modesty on the part of the Opposition if it did not say that the very existence of this second Money Resolution shows how right the Opposition has been about the Bill from its very beginning.

My hon. Friend the Member for Fulham (Mr. M. Stewart) was perfectly right. These concessions could not have been achieved if the Minister had succeeded in his first purpose, which was to rush the Bill frantically through Committee in such a way that none of its details should be seriously considered. I, too, regret the absence of a further paragraph by which we could have debated on Report of the Bill what upstairs in Committee we could but sketchily outline—the whole question of teachers' widows' and orphans' pensions.

I refer to paragraph (d). The Minister was right in his aside just now, when he said we are approaching the final stage of the Bill. It is that final stage at which we shall settle the whole question of teachers' pensions for quite a long time, for it is extremely unlikely that we shall have for a number of years any other opportunity of investigating that question.

One aspect of it arose in Committee upstairs, the entirely new question of the relationship of the young man who enters the teaching profession after two years of National Service and has no pension right for that. We could not discuss that because of the first Money Resolution. I should like confirmation from the Minister of my supposition that we can discuss that on Report of the Bill because of this second Money Resolution. National Service itself is a new factor. The second is equal pay. The two together involve inqualities and, indeed, injustice, no longer to the females but to the males.

Paragraph (d) says that the money available under this Money Resolution will enable the Minister …to treat as contributory service for the purpose of calculating the amounts of allowances or gratuities of teachers employed in contributory service previous employment providing experience of value to them as teachers… I do not think anybody could deny that National Service provides for a young man previous employment which will be of extreme value to him when he enters the teaching profession. What I am attempting to argue, what I should like the Minister to confirm or deny, is that this paragraph will enable us on Report of the Bill to discuss allowing National Service men to count their two years of military service towards their service as teachers and their teachers' pensions. I hope the Minister will deal with that.

Mr. Ede (South Shields)

On 6th March, 1923, I was sworn in for the first time as a Member of the House of Commons. The concluding words of the speech of my hon. Friend the Mem- ber for Cardiff, West (Mr. G. Thomas) has just made would have been regarded as most reactionary at that date, for in those days we used to vote against financial propositions on the ground that they were not generous enough. In these days, however, we are so thankful for small mercies from this Government that if we can get anything out of them at all it is a matter for great rejoicing. We therefore never turn round and say, "What a pitifully mean gang they are." We welcome these petty concessions as if we were being presented with some horn of plenty.

How has this second edition of Money (No. 2) Resolution come about? When was it decided on? Who was there when it was decided? Last Thursday after noon I asked the Lord Privy Seal: Has the right hon. Gentleman considered the Money (No. 2) Resolution relating to Teachers' (Superannuation), and has he examined it to see how narrowly it is drawn? The No. I Resolution actually precluded the moving in Committee of Government Amendments on the Bill. In view of the general feeling in the country about this matter, will the Lord Privy Seal examine this to see if something rather broader cannot be put down? The Lord Privy Seal replied: I have examined the Resolution in question. It relates, of course, to the three particular Government Amendments which were made in the course of the Bill, and it is designed to cover those three particular Amendments and is drawn in that sense. I will look at it again in the light of what the right hon. Gentleman has said, but that is the object of the Resolution."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 1st March, 1956; Vol. 549, c. 1377.] When I arrived here yesterday I found waiting for me a letter from the Lord Privy Seal marked "By hand"; it was dated Saturday, and it said: You will remember that on Thursday I promised to have another look at the new Money Resolution which has been put down for the Bill. As you know, it is usual to draft a Money Resolution so that it covers only such measures, as the Government actually intend to incorporate in a Bill. Well, I dissent from that view entirely. Ever since I have been in the House there has been a continual conflict between hon. Members on both sides of the House and Governments on Financial Resolutions being so drawn that only the Government's intentions can be discussed. My right hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland (Mr. Dalton) will, like me, recall many such discussions in pre-war days, and particularly one in which Mr. Neville Chamberlain took part in which he assured us that instructions would be given that Financial Resolutions should so be drawn that discussions should not be too narrowly limited. The Lord Privy Seal goes on: otherwise we should be giving ourselves financial cover which we did not propose to use. Yes, but the House has the right to some financial cover for things which it proposes to use and do. He goes on: We are of course now concerned only with adding to the existing Resolution such provisions as we need to cover the specific Amendments to the Bill which we propose to introduce. Upstairs in Committee we had, I think, about half-a-dozen new Clauses, which as an Opposition we desired to have discussed. Knowing the stony heart of the Minister, we did not expect to get them accepted, but at any rate we are entitled to put reasonable proposals forward to see if we can dislodge a few of the people sitting behind him from their allegiance, particularly when they are sitting upstairs. In the last House, my hon. Friends will remember one occasion on which we actually defeated the Minister by eight votes in Committee upstairs on something on which the then Minister had been quite adamant. The Lord Privy Seal continues: I think you will agree that no other course is open to us. However, I am glad to be able to tell you that after discussion with the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Minister of Education we propose to substitute a slightly more comprehensive Resolution for the one now on the Order Paper. The present Resolution covers three Government Amendments only. One will enable teachers re-employed in contributory service to draw so much of their pension as is needed to make up the difference, if any, between the salary they obtain on reemployment and their salary when they retired. The second will authorise the repayment of contributions to teachers re-employed in contributory service for less than 12 months, and therefore not qualifying for a further allowance. The third will enable pensions to be paid monthly. We shall add a further— Note the "we"; not the Minister of Education and the Secretary of State for Scotland but the trinity. I am a unitarian, but this is the trinity—the Lord Privy Seal, the Minister of Education and the Secretary of State for Scotland. I should not like to indicate their order of importance in the hierarchy, although I may suspect it. We shall add a further paragraph to cover a new Clause which will allow certain kinds of pre-teaching employment to be reckoned for pension purposes. When was that decision taken? It was not on Thursday, because the Minister of Education was sitting quite close to the Lord Privy Seal when he gave me that answer.

Sir D. Eccles

I was not in the House on Thursday.

Mr. Ede

The right hon. Gentleman answered Questions on Thursday.

Sir D. Eccles

But I went away.

Mr. Ede

At any rate, here is the Minister who is responsible for the business of the House—the Leader of the House. It was proposed to take something off the Order Paper and put something else on. No mention of it was made by the right hon. Gentleman when he announced for Tuesday the Committee Stage of the Money (No. 2) Resolution relating to teachers' superannuation. It was not an amended Resolution. It was the Resolution which had appeared on pages 7202 and 7203 of the Order Paper.

This is a very hasty decision, but it is quite in keeping with the whole conduct of this Measure, which has done more to bring the Ministry of Education into contempt for its understanding of the processes of Parliament than anything else I can recollect. When the Lord Privy Seal was my right hon. Friend, we were very particular about the way in which we approached the House so as never to get at cross purposes with it, and many were the reproofs which I had when it was thought that some rough word of mine might have delayed the passage of a Measure in which we were co-operatively associated.

I am glad that the Lord Privy Seal is here. The right hon. Gentleman is always here in spirit, but the trouble is that some of his right hon. Friends have not assimilated the spirit which he generally displays. The Bill has done more to make the teaching profession distrustful of the Ministry than anything else I can recollect in the 58 years with which I have been associated with the teaching profession. I want to make that quite clear. We have had this tardy way of giving concessions and discussion of only the things that the Government want discussed. It is a long time since there has been a Teachers (Superannuation) Bill, and I rather imagine, from the trouble caused by both this one and the one that never came up for Second Reading, that it will be a long time before we have another.

10.45 p.m.

There are a lot of silly, wretched, irritating limitations on the teachers' superannuation scheme that the House and the Committee ought to have had the opportunity of discussing. A good many of them were on the Order Paper, and they still are. They were ruled out by very experienced Chairmen of Committees on the ground that the Financial Resolution did not cover them. I cannot hope that they will be discussed, in spite of the guarded way in which my hon. Friend the Member for Fulham (Mr. M. Stewart) alluded to them. While there is life, I suppose he thought, there is hope, but the mere putting of a resolution on the Order Paper is no sign of life. In circumstances like this, it is generally evidence of despair.

I appeal to the right hon. Gentleman, even now, to let us have a third edition of this Money Resolution. Let us have it drafted so widely that those other new Clauses can be discussed and Parliament have the opportunity of considering them. I hope that in any event we shall soon have an opportunity of discussing a Teachers (Superannuation) Bill that will bring all the provisions relating to teachers' superannuation into one Bill so that they may be passed in a consolidating Act.

Miss Margaret Herbison (Lanarkshire, North)

As my hon. and right hon. Friends have said, we must welcome the provisions given by this second Financial Resolution, but we know clearly that all these provisions covered by the Resolution have had to be dragged out of both the Minister of Education and the Secretary of State for Scotland. They are matters which every teachers' organisation asked for before the Bill was first presented. It was only as a result of the many Amendments put down by the Opposition, and rarely supported by the Government side, that the Government tonight have had to bring forward this Financial Resolution.

I want to ask a few questions about paragraph (d). These seem to be its operative words: previous employment providing experience of value to them as teachers. My hon. Friend the Member for Itchen (Dr. King) asked whether this would cover the period of two years which young men spend on National Service. He suggested that those two years should be of value to a man when he became a teacher. We would like an assurance on this tonight. If young men's two years on National Service are in fact covered, the Government must have changed their minds considerably since we discussed the matter—the Scottish Members were in the fortunate position of being able to discuss it—in the Scottish Standing Committee.

The Joint Under-Secretary, in replying to the arguments which we adduced in support of this plea, told us that there were evilly disposed persons who were always ready to batten on the State. Those were his words. I hope, therefore, that the Leader of the House and the Minister of Education read that speech and decided that, although they were loath to do anything in the matter, they must save at least a bit of the reputation of this Government and therefore that paragraph (d) will cover those National Service men.

If one examines any type of work, apart from that performed by National Service men in their two years—

The Deputy-Chairman (Sir Rhys Hopkin Morris)

Order, order. The hon. Lady is in order in asking whether National Service is covered, but she is not in order in arguing that it should be covered.

Mr. William Ross (Kilmarnock)

May I draw attention to the fact that we are discussing paragraph (d), which refers to enabling the Minister to treat as contributory service…previous employment providing experience of value to them as teachers… Surely it is relevant to argue that what a man does during his National Service, whether in Cyprus or Germany, would be valuable to him as a teacher?

The Deputy-Chairman

It is in order to ask whether it is covered, but this is not the time to argue whether it should be covered.

Miss Herbison

With great respect, Sir Rhys, I take it that we are being asked tonight to pass this Money Resolution, and if we are being asked to do this we must know what men and women are going to be covered by the provisions in it.

The Deputy-Chairman

I said that the hon. Lady was in order in asking that, but she is not in order in proceeding further to argue that is should be covered.

Miss Herbison

National Service men apart, what type of other people will be covered by this Money Resolution? Will people be covered who have been working in industry? Will people be covered who have been working as technicians and technologists if we are able to attract them to this profession? Before passing this Money Resolution we want some idea of what categories of people will be covered. I ask these questions, Sir Rhys, because as Joint Under-Secretary of State for Scotland I had sometimes to make decisions on matters not unlike this one and I found that sometimes people were ruled out for flimsy reasons. So I feel that the Minister must be able to tell us tonight which people will be covered.

There is the further question, who will decide whether or not previous employment provides experience of value to these people as teachers? It is important that we should know.

The Deputy-Chairman

These are matters for the Bill and not for the Money Resolution.

Miss Herbison

But, Sir Rhys, these are not covered by the Bill. We have had its Second Reading, we have had its Committee stage. We are now at a very late stage of the Bill, so surely it is in order to know who will make the decision? Those are all the questions I want to ask, but every one of them is important.

The Deputy-Chairman

This is not an enacting Measure, it merely enables what is to be done.

Mr. Vosper

The right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede) asked me why this Money Resolution appeared on the Order Paper. In the first place, perhaps I should refer the right hon. Gentleman again, as I did when I moved the Motion, of the words I used on the first Money Resolution, namely: …should my right hon. Friend find a solution, a suitable Money Resolution would be moved at the appropriate time."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 6th December, 1955, Vol. 546, c. 341.] That was in respect of monetary payments under paragraph (c) of the first Money Resolution, and it is by far the most expensive of the four provisions in this second Money Resolution. As it was necessary to table a Money Resolution enabling that provision to be made, paragraphs (a) and (b), which are of minor importance, were incorporated in the new Resolution and paragraph (d) was explained in the letter which my right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal wrote to the right hon. Member for South Shields. At one stage I hoped that the right hon. Gentleman was about to congratulate my right hon. Friend on the text of that letter.

The right hon. Gentleman said that he dissented from the reasons given by my right hon. Friend for restricting the Money Resolution to cover only measures which the Government intended to incorporate in a Bill. I respect his opinion, but this practice is not unprecedented. It has been the procedure for a great number of years, including the years 1945 to 1951.

The hon. Member for Fulham (Mr. M. Stewart) directed most of his remarks to your predecessor, Sir Charles, and it is not for me, as the hon. Member told me on a previous occasion, to decide what is in order and what not in order in the next stage of the Bill. I should like to place on record that on the Committee stage of the Bill it was possible to have a discussion lasting 27 hours, a fairly wide discussion over the terms of the Bill, and no fewer than four of those hours were devoted to discussion of a widows' and orphans' pension scheme. It is not, however, for me to decide what will be called at a later stage of the Bill.

The hon. Member for Cardiff, West (Mr. G. Thomas) asked me two questions, the first of which was about provision for tubercular teachers. Possibly I did not make it clear at Committee stage that no Amendment to the Bill is needed. That provision will be covered by rules made under the relevant Clause.

The hon. Member for Cardiff, West, the hon. Lady the Member for Lanarkshire, North (Miss Herbison) and the hon. Member for Itchen (Dr. King) referred to National Service and asked whether paragraph (d) of the Money Resolution would cover it. Again, I cannot be drawn into deciding what will be called and what will not. The terms of the Resolu- tion are fairly widely drawn. In the course of the next day or two my right hon. Friend will be tabling a new Clause or Amendment to enable buying in to be discussed. It will then be open to hon. Members on both sides of the Committee to table an Amendment or new Clause which they think may be covered by this paragraph, but further than that I cannot go when speaking to this Resolution.

Mr. M. Stewart

Is it the considered view of the Government that time spent in National Service is time spent in a way that will be valuable to somebody who is to be a teacher? Can we have the Government's opinion on that point?

Mr. Vosper

I have limited experience in this House, but I think that I would be grossly out of order to reply to that intervention now. The new Clause will be tabled very soon, and I advise hon. Members to ask their questions and take what action they think fit when they have seen it.

The hon. Member for Cardiff, West accused my right hon. Friend of chopping and changing. That is not tenable, because it was always my right hon. Friend's intention, if possible, to overcome the difficulties and take these steps. He did not, as the hon. Gentleman suggested, reject as impossible the question of monthly payments. Speaking on the first Money Resolution, he said that he did not think that he could hold out any great hope that any easy solution would be found. It has not been an easy solution, and for that reason we will not be able to introduce it before April, 1957. By altering the Money Resolution, provision is being made to enable that Amendment to be made in due course. The Money Resolution is something which hon. Members on both sides of the Committee have welcomed. I hope that the discussion has proved useful, but I cannot hold out any hope that there will be a third edition of this Money Resolution.

11.0 p.m.

Mr. Ede

We are now in a most astounding position. This Financial Resolution, we are told, applies to a Clause not yet even on the Order Paper. On every other occasion that I can recollect, Money Resolutions have related to Bills which have had Second Readings and the House has known what was in those Bills and what words the Government have employed to use the money voted in the Resolutions. On this occasion, after the deplorable history of this Bill, we are asked to take the Financial Resolution first and then hope that the Clause which we are promised will be as good as the Parliamentary Secretary tells us it will be. But even he is not sure that it is going to be good enough to satisfy my hon. Friend the Member for Lanarkshire, North (Miss Herbison).

The Minister talks of 27 hours having been spent on the Bill in discussion upstairs; but we spent the first discussion in an endeavour to prevent our being asphyxiated, and certainly there was not much discussion on the Bill during that first 2½ hours. We were in the same difficulty as those poor fellows in the Sudan the other day; admittedly, they were less fortunate than we, but the Minister will recall that conditions were deplorable. Nothing that the Parliamentary Secretary has said tonight is any justification for my hon. Friends feeling the slightest confidence that when this new Clause does appear we shall be able to understand whether it covers the points which my hon. Friends have raised in respect of it.

When the right hon. Gentleman was appointed, I congratulated the House on the change because, as I then said, I felt that any change in that Department must have been for the better. Let me say now that I only wish we had the right hon. Lady the Member for Moss Side (Dame Florence Horsbrugh) back again. She did at least know her own mind and the mind of the Government which she served. But nowadays we sometimes get the Minister's own opinion, and sometimes that of the Government. Tonight we have had no opinion at all, and I can only say that it is not a very fitting thing to coincide with the thirty-third anniversary of my arrival in the House.

Resolved, That, for the purposes of any Act of the present Session to amend the Teachers (Superannuation) Acts, 1918 to 1946, and so much of the Education (Scotland) Acts, 1939 to 1953, as relates to superannuation and to the employment of teachers over the age of sixty-five years, and for purposes connected therewith, it is expedient to authorise the payment out of moneys provided by Parliament of any sums authorised or required to be so paid by virtue of any provisions of the said Act of the present Session (including any increase attributable thereto in the sums payable out of such moneys under any other enactment) being provisions—

  1. (a) for the restoration to teachers as from the commencement of the said Act of annual superannuation allowances previously terminated by reason of the re-employment of those teachers in contributory service or in employment which would apart from their age be contributory service, and the continued payment of annual superannuation allowances to teachers who, having been granted such allowances, are at that date or thereafter become re-employed as aforesaid;
  2. (b) for the repayment to teachers who, having been granted a superanuation allowance or gratuity, are at any time re-employed in contributory service, but do not qualify by virtue of their re-employment for any further allowance or gratuity, of contributions paid by them in respect of any period of re-employment after the commencement of the said Act;
  3. (c) amending the law as to the intervals at which instalments of annuities and annual allowances may be paid;
  4. (d) enabling the Minister to treat as contributory service for the purpose of calculating the amounts of allowances or gratuities of teachers employed in contributory service previous employment providing experience of value to them as teachers, being employment in respect of which contributions of such amount as the Minister may prescribe are paid by the teachers.

Resolution to be reported Tomorrow.