ROAD TRAFFIC BILL (Hansard, 31 May 1956)

HC Deb 31 May 1956 vol 553 cc443-57 443

§ As amended (in the Standing Committee and on recommittal), further considered.

§ New Clause.—(WAGES AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT OF PERSONS EMPLOYED IN PUBLIC SERVICE VEHICLES.)

Section ninety-three of the Act of 1930 (which contains provisions concerning the wages and conditions of employment of persons employed in public service vehicles) shall apply in relation to a contract carriage as it applies to a public service vehicle in use under a road service licence and accordingly subsections (1) and (2) of section one hundred and thirteen of the Act of 1930 (which relate to prosecutions and penalties) shall apply to any person decided by the Industrial Court to have been guilty of a breach of the said section ninety-three as applied by this section.—[Mr. Oliver.]

§ Brought up, and read the First time.

§ 3.43 p.m.

§ Mr. G. H. Oliver (Ilkeston)
I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time.
A stranger coming into this country would be surprised, if he were interested in industrial matters, to find that in 1956 it is necessary to move the Second Reading of a Clause of this character. As the Minister well knows—since we have discussed the matter rather fully in Standing Committee—the Clause purports to give to drivers of contract carriages the same protection in respect of wages and conditions of employment as is given to drivers of stage carriages and express carriages. We should give to drivers of coaches which bring visitors to and from London and the provinces the same protection as we give to drivers of our municipal buses and to drivers of express carriages, of which the best example I know is the Green Line coaches, for which the minimum fare is not less than 1s.
Section 93 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, reads as follows: The wages paid by the holder of any road service licence to persons employed by him in connection with the operation of a public service vehicle and the conditions of their employment shall not be less favourable to them than the wages which would be payable and the conditions which would have to be observed under a contract which complied with the requirement of any resolution of the House 444 of Commons for the time being in force applicable to contracts with Government departments. It is now 1956 and the time has come when we ought to take a step forward and incorporate, within the provisions which we made 25 years ago for drivers of public service vehicles, stage carriages and express carriages, the coach drivers with whom the people of this country are now so familiar.
I recognise that it is not quite as simple to deal with these drivers as it is to deal with stage carriage drivers and express carriage drivers who drive under a road service licence which is not applicable to a contract carriage. But I cannot believe that it is beyond the wit of man, and certainly not beyond the wit of people at the Ministry, to evolve a scheme to apply to this class of driver the conditions which are applied to other vehicle drivers. It may not be possible or necessary to apply a road service licence, but surely some other licence could be adopted which would bring about the same result.
It is most unfair to this large and everincreasing body of drivers to have no standard by which their wages and conditions of employment can be fixed and improved, and it is also unfair to employers that they do not know what their competitors are paying their drivers. There must be, therefore, a general tendency to obtain this class of driver free of any Industrial Court decision or of any organised mechanism for fixing rates of pay. Free of those trammels, the employer and workmen are at liberty to fix whatever price they like, and that is really disastrous to a well-organised industry of this kind in these days.
This matter was considered by the Thesiger Committee on the Licensing of Road Passenger Services, which stated, in paragraph 353 of its Report, headed "Fair Wages Clause—Section 93": This Section applies what is generally known as the Fair Wages Clause to holders of road service licences. It has been proposed to us that it should be extended to apply to contract carriage operators also. We agree, in principle, that the Section should be so modified as to require contract carriage operators to observe the appropriate rate for contract carriage work (which may differ from that for stage or express carriage work) in the district, and we recommend accordingly. If our proposal for a new form of licence relating to contract carriage work is adopted, failure to comply with this provision should be treated 445 as a breach of the conditions of that licence (as in the case of a road service licence at present). It has also been suggested that instead of the present requirement to observe wages and conditions of employment in accordance with the Fair Wages Clause, there should be substituted a requirement to observe wages and conditions in accordance with those of the appropriate National Council for the industry. It appears however that such National Council wages and conditions do not cover the whole of the country. We suggest that full discussion with the organisations of employers and workers concerned should precede any decision on this proposal. I am sure that the Thesiger Committee could never have reached that conclusion unless it had been satisfied on the evidence. The important thing is not the to and fro across the Floor of the House of Commons, but the evidence which the Committee had before it before reaching that decision, and the Thesiger Committee was satisfied that the time had come when some alteration should be made.
On that occasion, it was the Joint Parliamentary Secretary who replied to the debate in the Committee upstairs. Perhaps I might have his attention for a moment, which will also give me the opportunity of congratulating him upon his recent honour. If the right hon. Gentleman is not aware of the matter we are now discussing, let me tell him that we are discussing the new Clause in respect of Section 93 of the 1930 Act. Upstairs, the right hon. Gentleman said: I have listened to the debate with close attention, and I repeat that the Government are in no way opposed to the principle of applying the fair wages clause. Before anything of this kind is done it is obviously necessary that there should be consultation with both sides of the industry, and I am prepared to undertake that between now and the Report stage we will discuss the matter—naturally, with the Ministry of Labour, but also with the two sides of the industry."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Standing Committee B, 15th November, 1955, c. 426.] I do not know whether consultations have taken place, but I know that the opinions of the various bodies have been sought. That is not quite the same thing as consulting with the various bodies as to the applicability of that Section to these men. From the information I have been able to glean, it would appear that all the people directly concerned on the employers' side are in favour—but it is true that I have not myself interrogated those people.
446 I cannot understand the answer of the Minister to a Question I submitted a few weeks ago. The Minister said that he had received replies and that he was opposed to the application of that Section to these men. My information is that the Public Transport Association, the British Transport Commission and the Passenger Vehicle Operators' Association are all in favour of the application, and they appear to be the principal organisations concerned. Therefore, I should like to know whether consultations have been conducted or whether opinions only have been ascertained.
I hope, therefore, that the Minister will think seriously about this matter, because it seems iniquitous that we should be talking about the fair wages clause for a large body of people in the year 1956, and it is a slight on our intelligences if we cannot put these men in the same position as other drivers of motor vehicles.

§ Mr. Frank McLeavy (Bradford, East)
I beg to second the Motion.
It seems ridiculous that in these days, when, on both sides of the House, we accept the principle of the fair wages clause, and when the Government accept it as a matter of policy, we should hesitate to apply the principle in connection with contract carriages. The fair wages clause in every industry throughout the country is vital, from the point of view of both the employers and the employees.
There are two points involved. First, the fair wages clause ensures that those engaged in the industry are paid wages and are provided with conditions of employment which are in keeping with the recognised undertakings reached by negotiation or by some other means. Secondly, it also affords protection for the good employer of labour who wants to pay his men a fair wage and wants to give them fair conditions of employment but is up against some measure of competition. The fact that the fair wages clause has been so generally accepted throughout industry, and so generally accepted by both sides of this House, is in itself an indication that we believe in the principle not only of fair wages and fair conditions of employment, but also of fair competition.
I join with my hon. and learned Friend in asking the Minister to look into the matter again, in spite of the fact that he
447 replied in the negative some time ago. It is a small matter compared with the great issues involved. The principle is an important one, and I am sure that the Minister will say from the Dispatch Box this afternoon that he and the Government stand by it. And although this is a small matter, it is important to the individual concerned, whether he be an employer or an employee.
In these days, when we expect the fair wages clause to apply throughout the country, there is no justification for the Government or the Minister saying that there are difficulties which prevent the acceptance of this desirable protection for both sides of the industry. I believe that there are no difficulties which cannot be overcome if the Minister has the will and the determination to overcome them.
I ask the Minister, in the interests of both sides of the industry, in general fairness, and to maintain that pride which we have had for so many years and which has contributed to so much industrial peace and good will, to say this afternoon that he will see how far it is possible to implement the purpose of this new Clause to ensure that the contract carriages are brought into line with other sections of the transport industry.

§ 4.0 p.m.

§ Mr. Ernest Davies (Enfield, East)
I should like to add my support to what has been said by my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Ilkeston (Mr. Oliver), who moved this Motion, and my hon. Friend the Member for Bradford, East (Mr. McLeavy), who seconded it. I hope that the Government, after having given due consideration to this matter since it was raised during the Committee stage, have now come to the conclusion that this kind of provision is necessary, desirable and practicable.
As far as we gathered from the debates in Committee and from the consultations which have taken place, all are favourable to the application of the fair wages clause to contract carriages. The Thesiger Committee reported in favour of its application, and recommended that the fair wages clause should apply to all contract carriages. It is perfectly true that its recommendation included a new form of licence for such vehicles, which recommendation the Government decided they were unable to accept.
448 In parenthesis, one might say that this Committee reported about two and a half years ago and made a great number of recommendations. It is regrettable that very few of them have been accepted by the Government or have been acted upon. A large number of committees is appointed by different Ministries, and very valuable reports from them appear, yet so often they are pidgeon-holed and no action is taken.
In the case of the Thesiger Committee. I think that this recommendation, and many of the others, deserved a little more consideration and more favourable action than the Government appear to have taken. Not only did the Thesiger Committee recommend the application of the fair wages clause to contract carriages, but the trade unions are strongly in favour of it, and a very large section of the industry, I understand, is not opposed to its application. No doubt, the Minister will be able to give us more information about that, but I recall that, during our deliberations upstairs, the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) stated that private firms in the Midlands at least, as far as he was aware, observed the fair wages clause, and the hon. Gentleman implied, of course, that they were not opposed to its application.
When we had the debate in Committee, we gathered from the reply of the Joint Parliamentary Secretary that in principle the fair wages clause was accepted by the Government. Here, I, too, should like to extend my congratulations to the Joint Parliamentary Secretary on his elevation to the Privy Council, which is certainly deserved following the long spell which he has had at the Ministry of Transport and by reason of the very hard work which the right hon. Gentleman has put in. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] The Joint Parliamentary Secretary, after considerable pressure from this side, gave the impression that, in principle, the fair wages clause was accepted by the Government, as, of course, it is in a great number of cases. He added: —there is no reason of principle why it should not be extended to contract vehicles. In spite of the fact that the Government had rejected the recommendation of the Thesiger Report in connection with the 449 licensing of contract vehicles, the right hon. Gentleman added: I have no doubt that if it appeared to be desirable for a provision of this kind to be extended, the ingenuity of the Minister of Transport would be sufficient to produce some machinery by which it could be done."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Standing Committee B, 15th November, 1955; c. 425.] That is to say—and I share the belief— that the ability of the officials of his Ministry is such that, administratively, this would not be impossible. We think that it is very desirable, and we would very much like the Ministry to work out a form of administration which could bring it into effect.
As my hon. and learned Friend has said, from the reply to a Parliamentary Question recently it appeared that the Government have rejected the recommendation of the Thesiger Report after further consideration, and also the suggestions made by us during the Committee stage. I should like to know from the Minister why there has been this change of front. In Committee, we got the impression that, although the Joint Parliamentary Secretary gave no undertaking, and all he promised was to have further consultations and consider the matter, that it would be favourable consideration, and there now seems to have been a change of front.
There is a strong case here, which has been made out by my hon. Friends and which I do not need to repeat, for the application of the fair wages clause to the contract carriages, so that the whole industry is equally covered in that respect It may not be so easy to devise an administrative form for it in this case, because this is one part of the industry which is divided up into a very large number of separate operators. It is not well organised and not so easily controlled, but there is no reason to believe that some form of administration, with effective enforcement, could not be worked out.
There are considerable difficulties in this section of the road passenger transport industry. A very large number of small operators, as well as larger ones, have engaged in this contract carriage business, running private parties all over the country on different occasions. There is some part-time employment in the industry, and there is very considerable 450 competition. It is because of the considerable competition which exists and the division of the industry among so many operators that we feel concern for the well-being of the men employed. We are fearful that there is, on occasions, and that there might well be in future, undercutting in the industry which results in the men's wages and conditions of employment not being comparable with those in other sections of the industry or with those in comparable industries.
We suggest, therefore. for these reasons, that the Government should give serious consideration once more to the application of the fair wages clause to contract carriages. I trust that the Minister, having had this very long period since the debate took place in Committee on 15th November last year, which is about six months, has had an opportunity of full consultation with the unions and the industry, and also with the Ministry of Labour, and will perhaps now be able to give us some indication of what the result of these consultations has been.

§ The Minister of Transport and Civil Aviation (Mr. Harold Watkinson)
The matter which is raised by this new Clause is a very wide-ranging one, and I must trouble the House with a little detail. because it really is very important. As the hon. and learned Member for Ilkeston (Mr. Oliver) quite rightly said, my right hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary did undertake, in Committee, to go into this matter very fully and try to bring all concerned into consultation.
As this is the first opportunity that I have had, I should like to say in the House, because I think it is the right place to say it, how deeply grateful I am to my right hon. Friend the Joint Parliamentary Secretary for all the very great help which he has given me on this very complex and difficult Bill. I do not think that I could have got through without his great help and assistance. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] We had these consultations carried out quite properly and in detail, along with the Ministry of Labour, and, as the hon. and learned Gentleman said, they included the municipalities, the Transport Commission and the trade union side of the National Council for the Omnibus Industry. It is only fair to say that the municipalities and the Transport Commission on the whole favoured the idea, and so 451 did the unions. So there was no difficulty there.
This is the difficult point. When we went into it, as I did personally with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour, we found that there is great objection in principle to doing this through the fair wages clause. This is important and it needs to be explained. Nobody is more anxious than I am to get a fair wages obligation into operation in this part of the industry, but we found that in the past a fair wages clause has invariably been a condition of the grant to an industry or to a firm of a direct Government benefit in the way of a contract or something similar.
I knew a little about this, having been in the Ministry of Labour, but I was not aware how strictly it was applied. I am advised that the condition of the application of a fair wages clause has so far never breached the principle that it rests upon the grant by the Government of a benefit in some form or other to the person or industry to whom the clause applies. A holder of a road service licence can be said to receive Government benefit because it is a direct grant from the Government. That is why he is quite properly subject to the fair wages clause.
The difficulty is that, as has been pointed out, a contract carriage operator has no road service licence and, therefore, receives no such protection. Since his business consists primarily in private hire work, he is able to obtain it on his own account. I am advised that we cannot therefore maintain that there is any grant of Government favour to him in any possible way. The position is that if we were to do this for this relatively small but important number of people, we should be making a quite new precedent which has never occurred before.

§ Mr. Oliver
When the right hon. Gentleman refers to "benefit", is it not a notional benefit? If it is not notional, in what form is it enjoyed by the participants?

§ Mr. Watkinson
The holder of a road service licence does, of course, get some protection, for he gets protection from unrestricted competition. He gets it only by the Government grant of the licence. It is, I admit, a narrow point. None the 452 less, I am satisfied that if we were to do this through a fair wages clause, we would be creating a new precedent. My right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour has advised me that that is so and that it would start a new precedent for the application of a fair wages clause.
On those grounds, therefore, the new Clause rests upon, or would establish, a new principle which, I think, would be wrong. I am sensible of the powerful points that have been made by the hon. Member for Enfield, East (Mr. Ernest Davies) and his two hon. Friends and I agree that it would be both desirable and necessary—there is, I think, agreement in the whole House on this--if possible, to impose a similar duty to the fair wages clause. All I am saying is that it would be wrong to do it through the application of a fair wages clause.
Obviously, I cannot give a commitment, because it is only after these long discussions and examinations that the point finally came out, but I certainly undertake to examine carefully whether there is any other way in which we can impose this quite proper obligation upon this part of the industry. It cannot, however, be through the fair wages clause and I cannot at the moment see a way of doing it. I will certainly see whether the ingenuity of my Ministry can be stretched a little further.
I hope, therefore, that the hon. and learned Member will withdraw the new Clause, subject to the firm undertaking I have given to try to see whether we can find some other way of doing what is desired. I am sure that it would be wrong to breach the present principle of the grant of the fair wages clause.

§ Mr. McLeavy
If the Government accept the principle of the fair wages clause, surely no great principle would be involved if, without appearing to confer any benefit on a certain class but to bring that class into line with other sections of industry, they said that a question of public policy is involved and that, therefore, they propose to put the principle into effect.

§ 4.15 p.m.

§ Mr. Watkinson
That is a fair point, 'but, having looked carefully into the matter and consulted my colleagues who are concerned, I am sure that it would be wrong to do it in that way. It would,
453 therefore, be wrong for me to advise the House to accept the new Clause. I am sorry it has not been possible for me to go further in seeking alternatives. That has not been through any lack of will, but merely because the point finally came to settlement only a comparatively few weeks ago. Therefore, all I can do is to give a firm undertaking to see whether there is some other way of achieving this end.

§ Mr. G. R. Strauss (Vauxhall)
We all realise the difficulties inherent in this problem and most of us—certainly, all on this side of the House—are anxious that the fair wages principle should be extended to this class of people. Obviously, there are anomalies at the moment in that those working in ordinary express carriages, and so on, should be subject to the fair wages clause whilst people who work contract carriages are not subject to this protection.
The Minister and his Joint Parliamentary Secretary, to whom I should like to add my warm felicitations to those which have been expressed by others, have also said that they favour this principle and would like to apply it if they can. The right hon. Gentleman has just said that he will look into the matter and see what other steps can be taken.
The matter has been looked into for the last six months. We were told in Committee in November that it would be considered. The Bill is now before the House. It will shortly go to the other place, and when it is passed, which, we hope, will be within a few weeks, as far as I am aware there will be no other way of dealing with this proposal.
If we can be told by the Minister that there is another effective way outside of legislation by which it can be dealt with and that it is desired to deal with it, if possible, by such other means, that is something which my hon. Friends will take into account before deciding whether to divide the House. Alternatively, if the right hon. Gentleman says that he will be able to conclude his consideration of the matter by the time that the Bill goes to the House of Lords and, if possible, 454 have an Amendment moved there, that is something which we must also take into account. Otherwise, the situation appears to me that either we must assert the principle here or we have to give up any idea of its application perhaps for years to come.
The view of my hon. Friends—certainly, my view—is that if we are faced with that choice, in spite of all the difficulties that exist and the new precedents that are likely to be created. I would like the House to accept the principle now. I hope that if the Minister does not agree, the House will vote on the matter, because the fact appears to be that there is no chance of doing anything for years to come to get the proper protection of a fair wages clause for these people unless it is incorporated in the Bill.

§ Mr. Watkinson
if the right hon. Member for Vauxhall (Mr. G. R. Strauss) feels that he must divide the House, then he must divide it, because I cannot accept the fair wages clause as the way of doing this. I want to make that plain. Equally, I do not rule out that there is another way. For example, it may be possible to do this—this is not my responsibility, but that of my colleague the Minister of Labour—through the joint statutory machinery of the Industrial Disputes Order, which enables unions to bring an employer before the Industrial Disputes Tribunal on the ground that he is not observing recognised terms and conditions applicable to similar work in the area. The Tribunal can make an award requiring the employer to observe the required terms and conditions, or others not less favourable.
That is a possible means, and I think that my colleague the Minister of Labour has adequate powers to preserve that principle. I will certainly look at the matter before the Bill goes to another place, but I want to make it plain that I cannot do what is asked through an extension of the fair wages clause procedure.

§ Question put;—

§ The House divided: Ayes 176, Noes 230.

457

Division No. 198.]	AYES	[4.21 p.m
Ainsley, J.W.	Allen, Scholefield (Crewe)	Bence, C. C. (Dunbatonshire, E.)
Albu, A. H.	Anderson, Frank	Benn, Hn. Wedgwood (Bristol, S.E.)
Allaun, Frank (Salford, E.)	Bacon, Miss Alice	Benson, G.
Allon, Arthur (Bosworth)	Balfour, A.	Beswick, F

455

Bevan, Rt. Hon. A. (Ebbw Vale)	Hughes, Cledwyn (Anglesey)	Rankin, John
Blaokburn, F.	Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.)	Redhead, E. C.
Blyton, W. R.	Hunter, A. E.	Reeves, J.
Bottomley, Rt. Hon. A. G.	Hynd, H. (Accrington)	Reid, William
Bowden, H. W. (Leicester, S.W.)	Irving, S. (Dartford)	Robens, Rt. Hon. A.
Boyd, T. C.	Isaacs, Rt. Hon. G. A.	Roberts, Albert (Normanton)
Braddock, Mrs. Elizabeth	Danner, B.	Roberts, Goronwy (Caernarvon)
Brockway, A. F.	Jay, Rt. Hon. D. P. T.	Robinson, Kenneth (St. Pancras, N.)
Broughton, Dr. A. D. D.	Jeger,Mrs.Lena(Holbn & St.Pncs,S.)	Ross, William
Brown, Rt. Hon. George (Helper)	Johnson, James (Rugby)	Royle, C.
Burke, W. A.	Jones, David (The Hartlepools)	Shinwell, Rt. Hon. E.
Burton, Miss F. E.	Jones, Jack (Rotherham)	Short, E. W.
Butler, Mrs. Joyce (Wood Green)	Jones, J. Idwal (Wrexham)	Shurrner, P. L. E.
Callaghan, L. J.	Jones, T. W. (Merioneth)	Silverman, Julius (Aston)
Champion, A. J.	Kenyon, C.	Simmons, C. J. (Brierley Hill)
Chapman, W. D.	Key, Rt. Hon. C. W.	Skeffington, A. M.
Clunie, J.	Lawson, G. M.	Slater, Mrs. H. (Stoke, N.)
Coidrick, W.	Ledger, R. J.	Slater, J. (Sedgefield)
Collick, P. H. (Birkenhead)	Lee, Miss Jennie (Cannock)	Snow, J. W.
Collins, V. J.(Shoreditch & Finsbury)	Lewis, Arthur	Sorensen, R. W.
Cove, W. G.	Logan, D. G.	Stewart, Michael (Fulham)
Craddock, George (Bradford, S.)	Mabon, Dr. J. Dickson	Stokes, Rt. Hon. R. R. (Ipswich)
Darling, George (Hillsborough)	MacColl, J. E.	Stones, W. (Consett)
Davies, Ernest (Enfield, E.)	McInnes, J.	Strachey, Rt. Hon. J.
Deer, G.	McKay, John (Wallsend)	Strauss, Rt. Hon. George (Vauxhall)
de Freitas, Geoffrey	McLeavy, Frank	Stross,Dr.Barnett(Stoke-on.Trent,C.)
Delargy, H. J.	MacPherson, Malcolm (Stirling)	Summerskill, Rt. Hon. E.
Dodds, N. N.	Mahon, Simon	Sylvester, G. 0.
Donnelly, D. L.	Melialieu, E. L. (Brigg)	Taylor, Bernard (Mansfield)
Dugdale, Rt. Hn. John (W. Brmwch)	Marquand, Rt. Hon. H. A.	Taylor, John (West Lothian)
Ede, Rt. Hon. J. C.	Mellish, R. J.	Thomas, George (Cardiff)
Edelman, M.	Messer, Sir F.	Thomson, George (Dundee, E.)
Edwards, W. J. (Stepney)	Mitchison, G. R.	Thornton, E.
Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W.)	Moody, A. S.	Tomney, F.
Evans, Edward (Lowestoft)	Morris, Percy (Swansea, W.)	Usborne, H. C.
Fletcher, Eric	Morrison, Rt.Hn.Herbert(Lewis'm,S.)	Viant, S. P.
Forman, J. C.	Mort, D. L.	Warbey, W. N.
Fraser, Thomas (Hamilton)	Moss, R.	Weitzman, D.
Gooch, E. G.	Moyle, A.	Wells, Percy (Faversham)
Greenwood, Anthony	Neal, Harold (Bolsover)	West, D. G.
Grey, C. F.	Noel-Baker, Francis (Swindon)	Wheeldon, W. E.
Griffiths, David (Rothe, Valley)	Oliver, G. H.	White, Mrs. Eirene (E. Flint)
Griffiths, Rt. Hon. James (Llanelly)	Orem, A. E.	White, Henry (Derbyshire, N.E.)
Hale, Leslie	Orbaoh, M.	Willey, Frederick
Hamilton, W. W.	Oswald, T.	Williams, W. R. (Openshaw)
Hannan, W.	Owen, W. J.	Willis, Eustace (Edinburgh, E.)
Hastings, S.	Padley, W. E.	Winterbottom, Richard
Hayman, F. H.	Palmer, A. M. F.	Woodburn, Rt. Hon. A.
Healey, Denis	Pargiter, C. A.	Woof, R. E.
Henderson, Rt. Hn. A. (Rowly Regis)	Parker, J.	Yates, V. (Ladywood)
Herbison, Miss M.	Paton, John	Younger, Rt. Hon. K.
Hobson, C. R.	Plummer, Sir Leslie	Zilliacus, K.
Holmes, Horace	Price, Philips (Gloucestershire, W.)	_
Howell, Denis (All Saints)	Probert, A. R.	TELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Hoy, J. H.	Proctor, W. T.	Mr. J. T. Price and Mr. Wilkins.
Hubbard, T. F.	Randall, H. E.

NOES
Agnew, Cmdr. P. G.	Browne, J. Nixon (Craigton)	Doughty, C. J. A.
Amory, Rt. Hn. Heathcoat (Tiverton)	Bryan, P.	Drayson, G. B.
Anstruther-Gray, Major W. J.	Buchan-Hepburn, Rt. Hon. P. G. T.	du Cann, E. D. L.
Armstrong, C. W.	Bullus, Wing Commander E. E.	Duncan, Capt. J. A. L.
Atkins, H. E.	Burden, F. F. A.	Duthie, W. S
Baldwin, A. E.	Campbell, Sir David	Eden,Rt. H n.S irA ( W arwick&L'm'tn)
Barber, Anthony	Cary, Sir Robert	Emmet, Hon. Mrs. Evelyn
Barlow, Sir John	Channon, H.	Errington, Sir Eric
Barter, John	Chichester-Clark, R.	Erroll, F. J.
Baxter, Sir Beverley	Clarke, Brig. Terence (Portsmth, W.)	Farey-Jones, F. W.
Bell, Ronald (Bucks, S.)	Cole, Norman	Fell, A.
Bennett, F. M. (Torquay)	Conant, Maj. Sir Roger	Fletoher-Cooke, C.
Bidgood, J. C.	Cooper, Sqn. Ldr. Albert	Fort, R.
Biggs-Davison, J. A.	Cordeaux, Lt.-Col. J. K.	Foster, John
Black, C. W.	Corfield, Capt. F. V.	Fraser, Hon. Hugh (Stone)
Body, R. F.	Craddock, Beresford (Spelthorne)	Fraser, Sir Ian (M'cmbe & Lonsdale)
Boothby, Sir Robert	Crouch, R. F.	Freeth, D. K.
Bossom, Sir A. C.	Crowder, Sir John (Finchley)	Garner-Evans, E. H.
Bowen, E. R. (Cardigan)	Cunningham, Knox	George, J. C. (Pollok)
Boyd-Carpenter, Rt. Hon. J. A.	Currie, G. B. H.	Glover, D.
Boyle, Sir Edward	Dance, J. C. O.	Codber, J. B.
Braine, B. R.	D'Avigdor-Goldsmid, Sir Henry	Gough, C. F. H
Braithwaite, Sir Albert (Harrow, W.)	Deedes, W. F.	Gower, H. R.
Bromley-Davenport, Lt.-Col. W. H.	Dodds-Parker, A. D.	Grant, W (Woodside)
Brooman-White, R. C.	Donaldson, Cmdr. C. E. MeA.	Grant-Ferris, Wg Cdr. R. (Nantwich)

456 457

Green, A.	Linstead, Sir H. N.	Renton, D. L. M.
Gresham Cooke, R.	Lloyd, Rt. Hon. Selwyn (Wirral)	Ridsdale, J. E.
Grimston, Sir Robert (Westbury)	Longden, Gilbert	Rippon, A. G. F.
Grosvenor, Lt.-Col. R. G.	Low, Rt. Hon. A. R. W.	Roberts, Sir Peter (Heeley)
Hall, John (Wycombe)	Luoas, Sir Jocelyn (Portsmouth, S.)	Robertson, Sir David
Hare, Rt. Hon. J. N.	Lucas,P. B. (Brantford & Chiswick)	Robson-Brown, W.
Harris, Frederic (Croydon, N.W.)	Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh	Rodgers, John (Sevenoaks)
Harris, Reader (Heston)	Mackie, J. H. (Galloway)	Roper, Sir Harold
Harrison, A. B. C. (Maydon)	McLaughlin, Mrs. P.	Russell, R. 8.
Harrison, Col. J. H. (Eye)	Maclay, Rt. Hon. John	Scott-Miller, Cmdr. R.
Harvey, John (Wafthamstow, E.)	Maclean, Fitzroy (Lancaster)	Sharpies, R. C.
Hay, John	Macleod, Rt. Hn. lain (Enfield, W.)	Shepherd, William
Head, Rt. Hon. A. H.	Macmillan,Rt.Hn.Harold(Bromley)	Simon, J. E. S. (Middlesbrough, W.)
Heald, Rt. Hon. Sir Lionel	Macpherson, Malt (Dumfries)	Smithers, Peter (Winchester)
Heath, Rt. Hon. E. R. G.	Maddan, Martin	Spearman, A. C. M.
Hicks-Beach, Maj. W. W.	Maitland, Hon. Patrick (Lanark)	Speir, R. M.
Hill, Rt. Hon. Charles (Luton)	Manningham-Buller, Rt. Hn. Sir R.	Spens, Rt. Hn. Sir P. (Kens'gt'n, S.)
Hill, John (S. Norfolk)	Markham, Major Sir Frank	Stanley, Capt. Hon. Richard
Hinchingbrooke, Viscount	Marlowe, A. A. H.	Steward, Harold (Stockport, S.)
Hirst, Geoffrey	Marples, A. E.	Steward, Sir William (Woolwich, W.)
Holt, A. F.	Marshall, Douglas	Stewart, Henderson (Fife, E.)
Hope, Lord John	Mathew, R.	Stoddart-Scott, Col. M.
Hornsby-Smith, Miss M. P.	Maude, Angus	Studholme, H. G.
HOrObirl, Sir Ian	Maydon, Lt-Comdr, S. L. C.	Summers, G. S. (Aylesbury)
Howard, Hon. Greville (St. Ives)	Molson, A. H. E.	Taylor, William (Bradford, N.)
Hughes Hallett, Vice-Admiral J.	Monckton, Rt. Hon. Sir Walter	Teeling, W.
Hughes-Young, M. H. C.	Moore, Sir Thomas	Thompson, Kenneth (Walton)
Hurd, A. R.	Morrison, John (Salisbury)	Thompson, Lt.-Cdr.R.(Croydon, S.)
Hutehlson,Sir Ian Clark(E'b'gh, W.)	Mott-Radciyffe, C. E.	Thornton-Kemsiey, C. N.
Hutchison, Sir James (Sootstoun)	Nabarro, G. D. N.	Tiley, A. (Bradford, W.)
Hyde,Montgornery	Nairn, D. L. 8.	Tilney, John (Wavertree)
Hylton-Foster, Sir H. B. H.	Heave, Aker	Touche, Sir Gordon
Iremonger, T. L.	Nicholson, Godfrey (Farnham)	Turner, H. F. L.
Irvine, Bryant Godman (Rye)	Nicolson, N. (B'n'm'th, E. & Chr'Ch)	Tweedsmulr, Lady
Jenkins, Robert (Dulwich)	Noble, Comdr. A. H. P.	Vaughan-Morgan, J. K.
Jennings, J. C. (Burton)	Nugent, G. R. H.	Vickers, Miss J. H.
Johnson, Dr. Donald (Carlisle)	Ormsby-Gore, Hon. W. D.	Vosper, D. F.
Johnson, Erlo (Blackleg)	Orr, Capt. L. P. S.	Wade, D. W.
Joseph, Sir Keith	Orr-Ewing, Charles Ian (Hendon, N.)	Wakefield, Edward (Derbyshire, W.)
Keegan, D.	Page, R. G.	Wall, Major Patrick
Kerby, Capt. H. B.	Pannell, N. A. (Kirkdaie)	Ward, Hon. George (Worcester)
Kershaw, J. A.	Peyton, J. W. W.	Waterhouse, Capt. Flt. Hon. C.
Kimball, M.	Pilkington, Capt. R. A.	Watkinson, Rt. Hon. Harold
Kirk, P. M.	Pitman, I. J.	Whitelaw, W.S.I.(Penrith & Border)
Lagden, G. W.	Pitt, Miss E. M.	Williams, Paul (Sunderland, S.)
Lancaster, Col. C. G.	Pott, H. P.	Williams, R. Dudley (Exeter)
Langford-Holt, J. A.	Powell, J. Enoch	Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)
Leavey, J. A.	Prior.Paimer, Brig. 0. L.	Woollam, John Victor
Leburn, W. G.	Raikes, Sir Victor	Yates, William (The Wrekin)
Legge-Bourke, Maj. E. A. H.	Ramsden, J. E.
Legh, Hon. Peter (Petersfieid)	Rawlinson, Peter	TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Lindsay, Hon. James (Devon, N.)	Redmayne, M.	Mr. Oakshott and Mr. Wills.
Lindsay, Martin (Solihull)	Remnant, Hon. P.