HC Deb 30 March 1960 vol 620 cc1369-77
Mr. P. Thomas

I beg to move, in page 8, line 6, at the end to insert: (3) References in this Act to a deduction do not include a part of an employed person's wages which is paid into an account at a bank in pursuance of such a request as is mentioned in subsection (6) of section one of this Act. This is a purely technical Amendment. It is designed to make it clear that payment into a bank in pursuance of a request for the payment of part of wages in this way is not to be treated for the purposes of the pay statement as a deduction. This provision is necessary because Clause 2 and the Schedule require the pay statement to show payments of wages and deductions separately.

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

Mr. Graham Page

I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, to leave out from "paid" to the end and to add: in any of the ways authorised by this Act. As my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary said, his Amendment refers to part payments under Clause 1 (6) and declares that the part payments shall not be deductions and, therefore, shall be lawful. But there are also part payments which are provided for under Clause 4 (4). In the case of payments by postal order or money order to which a request under Clause 1 already applies, part may be paid into a bank and part may be paid by postal order. If we declare that the part paid into a bank is a lawful deduction—or not a deduction, as my hon. Friend's Amendment says—then the part which is paid by postal order must surely be a deduction and, therefore, unlawful. It would surely be much clearer to say that any deduction authorised by the Bill should be included and not merely the one which relates to payment into a bank.

If my Amendment to the proposed Amendment is accepted, subsection (3) will read: References in this Act to a deduction do not include a part of an employed person's wages which is paid in any of the ways authorised by this Act. That is surely what is intended by my hon. Friend's Amendment—that "deductions" do not include any deductions "authorised by this Act". I cannot see the reason for restricting it to deductions made by payment of a part of the wages into a bank. To restrict it to these makes it look as if the postal order payment is in some way unlawful when payments are split up into a bank statement and a postal order payment.

5.30 p.m.

Mr. P. Thomas

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Crosby (Mr. Page) for raising this matter. Perhaps I should say that the purpose of my right hon. Frjend's Amendment was to make it clear that, as I said, payment into a bank in pursuance of a request for part of wages to be paid in that way was not to be treated, for purposes of the pay statement, as a deduction.

The reason we singled out payments into a banking account for special treatment was because we felt that an employer might be somewhat confused in that payments into a banking account would not be payments direct to an employee and that, therefore, the employer might think that it was something which would have to be put into the statement as a deduction. In the case of payment to an employee direct, by cheque, by money order or by postal order, the average employer would have no doubt at all that he would not have to put that down as a deduction.

I quite understand what my hon. Friend has said and I agree that there may be cases in which there is confusion and that, therefore, it may be as well to make certain that no employer is under any misapprehension. I am perfectly prepared to accept my hon. Friend's Amendment.

Amendment to the proposed Amendment agreed to.

Proposed words, as amended, there inserted in the Bill.

Mr. Prentice

I beg to move, in page 8, line 32, at the end to insert: (e) the Post Office Savings Bank. The possibility of adding the Post Office Savings Bank to the list of other savings banks which are eligible for the provisions of the Bill was mentioned on Second Reading and again in Committee. We have been waiting to hear the final conclusions of the Government on the matter. In a sense, we put down this Amendment to enable the Government to give us, we hope, some more news of the matter this afternoon.

Our arguments in favour of adding the Post Office can be stated very briefly. The first is that the object of the Bill is to enlarge the freedom of the individual workman to receive his wages in different ways and that, therefore, we should cast the net as widely as we can and, if at all possible, include the Post Office Savings Bank.

The second reason is that post offices are generally more accessible throughout the country, especially in rural areas. There are sub-post offices in quite small communities where, of course, there are no branches of banks. Our third reason is that we think that the Post Office Savings Bank, as it operates at present— we appreciate that it would need some amendment to its rules—offers a very good bargain to those who save through it, and we should like to see that benefit extended. We think that important from the point of view of those who use it.

We would add that the Post Office is something that belongs to us, and therefore, we have put down the Amendment as good Socialists. We say that here is a Bill which is to provide new business for privately-owned banks and we do not see why it should not provide new business for the publicly-owned Post Office.

On Second Reading and in Committee the Minister was not altogether unsympathetic to the suggestion, but he indicated that he was consulting his right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General on these matters because, as he said, some amendment would be required to the Post Office Savings Bank Act and that many changes would have to be made in the organisation of the Post Office if it were to operate this service.

This is something that was recommended by the Radcliffe Committee, which suggested that the operations of the Post Office Savings Bank should be extended. I looked eagerly at the White Paper on the new status of the Post Office, issued yesterday, to see whether there was any indication in it of alterations which would meet the point. That does not seem to be the case. At any rate, we are now offering the Minister an opportunity of telling us what further progress has been made in his talks with his right hon. Friend and whether he can give us any more news about the prospect of including the Post Office Savings Bank in the list.

Mr. Heath

The hon. Member for East Ham, North (Mr. Prentice) has very accurately described the position. At the end of the Committee stage I undertook to inform the House, on Report, whether my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General was yet in a position to say what his plans were in regard to this aspect of the working of the Post Office. I was in consultation with my right hon. Friend at the end of last week when we put down the rest of the Amendments.

The inquiries which my right hon. Friend is making into the changes that would be required in the internal organisation of the Post Office, if it were to be included in the Bill, and also as a result of the recommendations of the Radcliffe Committee have proceeded quite a long way, but my right hon. Friend is not yet in a position to announce his conclusions on the inquiries that he has been making. Therefore, I think that, for the reasons I gave in Committee, it would still be wise not to include the Post Office Savings Bank in the definition in the Bill. Of course, as soon as my right hon. Friend is able to announce any conclusions we shall be able to take action. If, while the Bill was going through another place, he were able to do so, we could take action there.

As I explained on Second Reading and again in Committee, and, indeed, as the hon. Gentleman has just mentioned, if the Post Office Savings Bank is to be used in the scheme the changes would require legislation. As soon as those changes can be made, this Bill could be amended by that legislation so as to include the Post Office Savings Bank in the scheme, so that no time would be lost if it proved practical to include the Post Office Savings Bank. I hope, therefore, that the hon. Gentleman will feel able to withdraw his Amendment.

Mr. Ede (South Shields)

Surely it would be a very great pity to have to introduce another Bill and go through all its stages in two Houses of Parliament to do this very sensible thing. Could it not be done in another place by inserting these words and then making the bringing into operation of this phrase in the Bill dependent upon an appointed day to be fixed by the Minister in accordance with Clause 7, line 16, which enables him to make appointed days?

The right hon. Gentleman knows from his immediate past experience how unpopular it is with Chief Whips when Ministers come along and say, "I just want a little Bill to correct something that we could not quite do when we passed the original Measure." The right hon. Gentleman knows the difficulties that might arise if he did that. If he could promise us that he would try, in another place, to amend the Bill on the lines I have mentioned, we should be very glad.

Mr. Heath

I do not think that the right hon. Gentleman has appreciated that it is not the legislation in respect of this Bill which is worrying us. It is that the system of the Post Office itself would have to be changed to enable the Bill to be operated for the payment into Post Office Savings Bank accounts of wages. The change in the system would itself require legislation. It is not merely a matter of including the Post Office Bank among the institutions to be used under the Bill. The main question is changing the Post Office Savings Bank Act, 1954. That would need to be changed to enable the Post Office system itself to be changed, to enable the Post Office to be used under the Bill.

Rather than mislead some people by adding the Post Office Bank to the institutions named in the Bill, we think that it should be left to be included in the Bill which itself will change the Post Office system.

Mr. Ede

The right hon. Gentleman knows how awkward draftsmen are when there is a suggestion that legislation dealing with certain subjects should be in certain Acts. This is a Payment of Wages Bill and if draftsmen want to be awkward they will tell the right hon. Gentleman, as he well knows, that it would be very wrong to put a provision dealing with the payment of wages to ordinary people in a Bill amending Post Office law. He and I, of course, can go on arguing small points on this matter from past experience and nobody will get much further.

I hope, however, that the right hon. Gentleman will be able to examine these two points very carefully—the position of the Post Office and the position of this Bill—in such a way that we shall not need to have a new Payment of Wages Bill and all payment of wages matters will be in Payment of Wages Acts.

Mr. Mapp

I take perhaps what is a minority view about this aspect of the Bill. I would condition the whole Bill on the acceptance and the implementation of its operation being available through the Post Office. I would not permit the Bill to become an Act conferring great advantages on the banking institutions whose hours of business are limited for working people and whose facilities are not readily accessible to them. In looking at this subject, the Government should approach the next few years with a view to expanding facilities for ordinary people in substitution for the payment of cash, and they should bring completely into the picture the services of the Post Office.

It should be remembered that post offices are much more accessible than banks. They are to be found in almost every village and every district of every town and all people, especially working people, are familiar with the Post Office and its personnel and have complete trust in it. I feel that there is pressure behind the introduction of the Bill. I can recognise the pressure that is coming from great banking institutions and massive industrial organisations. If, by means of the Bill, the House confers on these authorities considerable advantages in terms of accountancy and the facilities flowing to workpeople will be still restricted to existing banking institutions, I shall withhold my consent to the Bill.

5.45 p.m.

Even now, despite what the Minister has said, and after reading again with interest the White Paper "The Status of the Post Office", issued last night, to see whether the Postmaster-General was prepared to look at the Post Office with a vision of the future or be involved in some argument about the past, I notice that no provision is made for the expansion of Post Office services so that the Post Office can provide the banking arrangements of the average employed man and woman.

I feel so strongly about this that I would not be prepared to let this matter go through unopposed. I hope that the Minister and the Postmaster-General will look again to the future. We all want to encourage the idea of banking and savings, and I beg the Government to extend their vision away from existing banking institutions and bring the Post Office within the ambit of the Bill.

Mr. Harry Randall (Gateshead, West)

I understood that the Minister, in giving his explanation to the House, said that proceedings had gone quite a long way in the inquiry from his right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General on whether this proposal should be implemented. In putting the matter over in a very conciliatory way, I thought that the right hon. Gentleman was inviting the House to postpone or not take a decision, but I took note that when he said that inquiries had proceeded quite a long way he gave no indication whether the proposal had been received favourably or unfavourably.

If the disposition is to give the matter favourable consideration, the suggestion made by my right hon. Friend the Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede) should be adopted in another place. There may be difficulties, but if there is good will and the difficulties are surmounted, then surely it is better so to amend the Bill that when it becomes necessary to amend the Post Office Act we shall not then be in the position of having to amend two instead of one Measure. I ask the Minister to be good enough to tell us whether the proceedings of inquiry so far indicate a favourable reception. If he can go that far, would he not also consider my right hon. Friend's suggestion?

Mr. Heath

In reply to the hon. Member for Oldham, East (Mr. Mapp) it is, of course, just these very inquiries that my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General is making. I assure the hon. Member, as I have assured the House, that my right hon. Friend is looking at the matter very thoroughly to find whether the Post Office can and should be adapted to this system. It is a fairly complex matter and one can visualise the considerable changes which would be required in the system.

I cannot tell the hon. Member for Gateshead, West (Mr. Randall) whether the matter is being reviewed favourably or unfavourably because, as I said, my right hon. Friend has not yet reached a conclusion. Inquiries have gone a long way. My right hon. Friend informed the House in December that he had set up a committee inside the Post Office to examine this and the recommendations of the Radcliffe Report, but he is not yet able to tell me his conclusions.

The right hon. Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede) speaks from a distinguished position of experience. It would not be for me to indicate to the House that any draftsman has been other than extremely helpful to a Minister— while in power. All that I would like to say is that we have looked to the future with those concerned and I am satisfied that this matter can be dealt with in this way. If my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General reaches a conclusion in time to deal with this in another place we shall have the opportunity of doing so.

Mr. Prentice

I am sorry that the right hon. Gentleman has not been able to give us a decision today, but I appreciate the way in which he has dealt with the matter. I can assure him that we shall keep after him about it, and from time to time will return to the subject, either at Question Time or on other occasions, to see how he is getting on. If he is able to do something by the time the Bill reaches another place, we shall be all the more happy. In any case. I hope that it will not be too long before the Post Office Savings Bank can extend its activities in the way suggested, and be brought within the scope of the Bill.

Having said that, Mr. Deputy-Speaker, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.