HC Deb 03 July 1958 vol 590 cc1707-9

Lords Amendment: After the Amendment last inserted, insert new Clause D: Her Majesty may by Order in Council revoke or vary any Order in Council made under section twelve of the Maintenance Orders (Facilities for Enforcement) Act, 1920 (which provides for the extension of that Act by Order in Council to certain oversea territories), and an Order under this section may contain such incidental, consequential and transitional provisions as Her Majesty considers expedient for the purposes of that Act.

Mr. Renton

I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.

This new Clause is designed to enable the many Orders in Council which have been made under the Maintenance Orders (Facilities for Enforcement) Act, 1920, to be consolidated. A very strange position has come to light in that that Act does not contain any power for the Orders made under it to be either revoked or varied. Forty-four Orders have now accumulated, some of which really ought to be varied, such as, for example, several which cover what is now the State of Ghana. We ask the House to accept this new Clause in these terms to enable Her Majesty, by Order in Council, to revoke or vary any of the Orders in Council made under the 1920 Act.

It may seem surprising to hon. Gentlemen that we have brought this into the Bill but, as we are dealing with maintenance orders, it seems a very convenient Amendment to clear up this strange and rather old statutory anomaly.

Mr. Ede

It seems to me that there is no objection to using this Bill to do something which is common sense for once. I am quite sure that my hon. Friends will not wish to object to its coming in.

I have been rather handicapped in following some of the last of the Lords Amendments because of their excessive length. The first Amendment of my hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale (Mr. Anthony Greenwood) to one of the new Clauses alluded to line 26 in it. I still retain just sufficient acquaintance with numbers to be able to count up to 26, but could not the authorities of the House consider putting numbers by the side of every fifth line so that, when one has to find one's way about these very long Lords Amendments, one could do it with the ease that their Lordships should allow to Commoners who have to work very hard?

Mr. Renton

May I be so bold as to support what the right hon. Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede) has said? While I was working out one of these Amendments, the telephone rang twice while I was about half-way down the page. It really would make for very great ease if Lords Amendments could be numbered as our own always are.

Mr. Lee

I support what has been said by my right hon. Friend the Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede) and by the hon. and learned Gentleman. We on this side have not the advantage of the assistance of civil servants, and it is certainly very difficult, when trying to find one's way through very long Lords Amendments, to be sure whether one is at line 25, 30, or whatever it may be.

Question put and agreed to.