§ Where any person disposes of assets for the purpose of realising sufficient to purchase a residence in the United Kingdom, any gain arising from such disposal shall not be a chargeable gain:1442
§ Provided that—
- (1) the said residence shall be intended to be the sole residence of such person;
- (2) the purchaser shall not have occupied and owned a residence within the United Kingdom within ten years prior to the said purchase;
- (3) the exemption from capital gains tax shall not apply to any amount realised exceeding £5,000, and
- (4) the said exemption provided by this section shall benefit any person only once in his lifetime.—[Sir D. Renton.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.
§ 8.0 p.m.
§ Sir David Renton (Huntingdonshire)
I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time.
The Clause deals with Capital Gains Tax and, if accepted, would presumably be inserted after Clause 28. The Clause is of vital importance to thousands of members of the Armed Forces and their families and is of importance also to the 70,000 police officers and their families. This is why, among my right hon. and hon. Friends who support it, are two former Service Ministers and two former Home Office Ministers. Although the Clause is of such importance to the Armed Forces and to the police force, it has the added virtue that it fills a gap and rectifies an anomaly in the Bill as it stands—that is, in the Capital Gains Tax provisions of the Bill. To this extent, the Clause is, I concede, of wider application as well. The Government have rightly provided in Clause 28 for relief from Capital Gains Tax which would otherwise accrue on the disposal of a private residence when it is occupied by its owner. Without going into details and exceptions, that, broadly, is the effect of Clause 28.
Members of the Armed Forces and of the police force are nearly always in a position which cannot have been contemplated when Clause 28 was drafted. The very nature of their service requires them to move about. Police officers have to move about the county in which they serve. Whether in a county or in a borough, they generally have to live in police accommodation provided for them by the police authority. Members of the Armed Forces have to move about the world. They are very often compelled to live in accommodation specially provided for them. Indeed, I understand that under Queen's Regulations they can be compelled to occupy even married quarters. It follows from this that they cannot normally contemplate living in a home of their own until they retire and leave the Service.
1444 During their service they save up for buying a house on retirement. There are several ways in which they can do so. One way—and the way with which we are most concerned in considering the Bill, and especially the new Clause—is for them to buy Government stock or other securities and then to sell their stock or their shares, as the case may be, on retirement and use the proceeds to buy a house. They should not be discouraged from this method of saving. Whatever other effect the Finance Bill may have, presumably the Government do not wish to discourage people from investing in Government securities, although we think that they may be discouraged.
At any rate, that is a method which is used by quite a number of Service people to save up during their lives and provide funds for the buying of a house. But, alas, if they use this method, they will have to pay the long-term Capital Gains Tax, which under Clause 19 will be 30 per cent. They will have to pay up to 30 per cent. on the proceeds of the sale of their securities before they can use the proceeds of sale for buying a home for their retirement. I suggest that that would be a very poor reward for their service to the country, especially as people who are not in the Services will, under the Bill, be able to continue to buy their houses as they live in them and occupy their houses as they save. On retirement they can sell their homes for capital gain and, quite rightly, thanks to Clause 28, they will not have to pay Capital Gains Tax on the transaction. This is a most absurdly contrasted position between Service people and the police, on the one hand, and others buying, saving and living in their homes, on the other.
I concede that if the Clause were accepted it would sometimes benefit others who have not been in the Armed Forces or the police force. Those of us who have drafted the Clause have foreseen that. The proviso sets four limitations which will apply and which should make the Clause more acceptable to the Government. They make the Clause into a very modest provision. We say, first, that the residence which is to be bought shall be the sole residence of the person concerned. We say, secondly, that the purchaser shall not have occupied and owned any house within the United Kingdom within 10 years before the purchase. 1445 We say, thirdly, that the exemption from Capital Gains Tax shall apply only to the first £5,000 of the proceeds of sale of the assets concerned. We say, lastly, that this is an exemption which will apply only once in a person's lifetime.
Therefore, the cost of the exemption could not be very great. The opportunities for abuse are practically nil. Phrased as it is, and with that proviso, the Clause would meet precisely the needs of members of the Armed Forces which I have endeavoured to describe. I quote from a letter which I have received from the wife of a serving officer in the Royal Air Force in my constituency:Under this year's Finance Bill we stand to lose 30 per cent. of the capital appreciation of our savings; our counterpart in civil life who is buying his own house as his form of saving can sell his house when he retires without paying any tax on his capital gain. It would seem that personnel serving in the Armed Services cannot now save in such a way as to offset the rising prices and falling value of the £.My correspondent also says:We are saving towards the day when we shall want to buy the house and a large proportion of our savings are in the shares of various companies and unit trusts.That is a perfectly sensible and laudable thing for these people to be doing. We are not wedded to the exact phraseology of the Clause, but it seems that unless the new Clause, or something like it, which incorporates in the Bill the spirit behind it, is accepted there will be a serious anomaly. There will also be a serious injustice, which will bear very harshly upon members of the Armed Forces and of the police force, whose welfare and interest we in the House have a great duty to protect.
§ Sir D. Renton
In the course of my speech I have conceded that, in the nature of things, the Clause would have a wider application. My hon. Friend has given the example of members of the teaching profession, very fine people who ought not to be penalised in the way in which they will be penalised under the Bill. One can think of others. One can think of those members of the public service 1446 who, for example, serve abroad and those who have helped this country by living their working lives abroad, but who look forward one day to buying a home in this country for their retirement.
I have stated the case as moderately as I can, and I hope that we shall have a sympathetic response from the Government.
§ Rear-Admiral Morgan Giles (Winchester)
I support my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Huntingdonshire (Sir D. Renton). This proposed Clause should instantly commend itself to any Chancellor of the Exchequer, and particularly to a Chancellor belonging to a party whose members so often have the words "social justice" on their lips.
This Clause seeks to provide social justice for those whose calling prevents them from owning a house of their own until relatively late in life. As my right hon. and learned Friend has pointed out, the category which first comes to mind is that of the Armed Forces. Officers and men of the Navy, Army and Air Force, who are in the very nature of things likely to be sent anywhere in the world at short notice, face a special dilemma when they marry. Either they must buy a house and install their families there, and risk thereafter seeing very little indeed of their families, or alternatively the families must follow the fleet, so to speak, and have no house of their own.
I can testify from many years of experience that a condition of no fixed abode has very real disadvantages, especially for families, and particularly children, let alone what it does to the men concerned. My experience is not only personal, involving my own family, but it also arises from a considerable number of years as a commanding officer of ships at sea and overseas, whose ships companies often get themselves into great difficulty due to what one might call a chronic condition of homelessness. If this condition has real disadvantages for officers, as it does, it has perhaps even greater disadvantages for other ranks who, through no fault of their own, often find it particularly difficult to meet the additional expenses of constantly moving house and home.
It can be argued that separation and constant moving are inevitable in Service 1447 life, that people go into the Services with their eyes open and must accept this feature of life in the Services. This is, no doubt, to some extent true, but I do not think this is the point at issue here. The point is that if Service people are effectively debarred from owning their own houses, when they eventually come to buy a house later in life, either on retirement or when their children reach school age, houses will by that time have become much more expensive to buy, as my right hon. and learned Friend has pointed out. Certainly, this has been the case in the conditions of inflation which have existed ever since the end of the war.
My right hon. and learned Friend pointed out that it is not only members of the Armed Services who would be affected by this Clause. There are policemen, prison officers, of whom I have a large number in my constituency, nurses, certain civil servants, people in the Foreign Service, and people who work overseas perhaps in support of this country's export initiatives. All these have one thing in common, and that is that they are people of value to the community. They are people of first-class quality, whom any Government must be anxious to recruit. Therefore, this is more than a financial measure. If this Clause were accepted, it might be found to have a remarkable effect on recruiting to these categories of people whom we are discussing.
The Clause as drafted seems to me to cover the circumstances very well indeed. It is absolutely clear and concise. It leaves no loopholes. In fact, I think that my only objection to it is that it does not go far enough, especially as regards the upper limits mentioned in subsection (3). There is one further point to be said in favour of the Clause, and that is that it is completely comprehensible, and in this way it is in considerable contrast to many Clauses in the Bill.
I therefore support the Clause very strongly as providing a measure of social justice for sections of the community who deserve very well of their country.
§ Mr. James Ramsden (Harrogate)
I wish briefly to support the Clause, which was moved by my right hon. and learned 1448 Friend the Member for Huntingdonshire (Sir D. Renton) in eminently reasonable terms. I do not wish to reiterate his arguments because he put them extremely cogently, but I should like to underline one aspect of what he said.
It is undoubtedly true that the problem of where to house themselves and their families is extremely important for members of all three Services, particularly during the latter years of their engagement. Speaking from memory, in the Army alone there are about 15,000 men running out every year, and that is only one Service. Therefore, this is not a negligible problem affecting a negligible number of people. When they leave the Services they need somewhere to live. They cannot always get a house to rent.
As hon. Members on both sides of the House know, this is a considerable problem for local authorities constantly having Service families added to their waiting lists. They are extremely helpful for the most part, and I am sure we all wish to pay tribute to their efforts, but they cannot conceivably in fairness to their own people, cope with the whole of the demand, and the fact is that many of these Service families, if not the majority, must satisfy their needs by buying houses of their own.
It was in recognition of this fact, and the importance of this factor in Service life, that the former Government instituted what was called a "Save while you serve" scheme to promote among Service men the desire to save weekly, from their pay packets, with a building society with the specific object of buying their houses when they came out. Probably this scheme is not affected by this Clause, but I ask the Financial Secretary for an assurance that the Capital Gains Tax will in no conceivable circumstances have any impact on savings through this scheme with building societies for the future purchase of their homes by Service men.
Of course, there are many who do not wish to save through building societies, but who wish to save in other ways. The savings they can make are very often substantial. It is nothing unusual in these days, at present Service rates of pay, for a man to earn £15 or £20 a week. Accommodated in married quarters and drawing all the appropriate allowances, 1449 he can make appreciable weekly savings and may, during his service, accumulate a capital sum in the region of the figures that we are talking about in this Clause.
More often than not, these savings are pre-empted for the eventual purchase of a home. If the Clause is not accepted we shall have the position of which my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Huntingdonshire gave an example—a Service family on the one hand and a civilian family on the other, both on the same rate of pay, both with the same number of children, and both of the same age. The civilian family will have settled down and put their savings into a house, and to the extent that their savings are invested in house property they will be both hedged against inflation and, if the house is sold and replaced by another, exempt from the impact of Capital Gains Tax.
With the Service family, on the other hand, because they have had to postpone the moment of converting savings into a house and they hold those savings in some form of investment, when the time comes for them to be realised and put into a house property they will be subject to the diminution of a 30 per cent. Capital Gains Tax.
This seems to me to be a totally indefensible anomaly and I cannot think of an hon. Member who would wish to see that perpetuated. I draw attention, as my right hon. and learned Friend did, to the extremely moderate way in which the Clause is drawn. It is so hedged about with restriction that it cannot possibly be open to abuse, and it is drawn as nearly as it can be so as to direct the benefits to the class of people whom we believe will be seriously prejudiced in their housing as compared with similar people if the Clause is not accepted.
§ Mr. Gower
After listening to the debate I feel that the Financial Secretary to the Treasury will not have the heart to reject so worthy a Clause as this which has been put forward in such clear and reasonable terms. The need for the Clause applies not only to the Armed Services but also to members of the police force, to members of the remaining Colonial Service, to businessmen who have worked abroad and also, as I sug- 1450 gested in an intervention, to some members of the teaching profession. The need for it applies in a particularly aggravated form to certain ministers of religion who have lived their active lives in rectories and manses and have to make provision for themselves when they retire.
As my right hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate (Mr. Ramsden) pointed out, this is an extremely difficult situation for these people, because in many cases they cannot obtain accommodation from local authorities. Some local authorities make every effort but others are either not able or not willing to make the same effort to accommodate them, and these people are placed in the predicament of having to make provision for themselves. As for the police force, only recently I visited a new kind of police house and I expressed to the police officer and his wife my feeling that it was much superior to the kind which I had seen in the past. The police officer said rather ruefully, "In some ways I wish that I had not had this house, because when I leave I shall have to buy a house and at a very high price." The market is always moving against these people and it has been so moving for many years. This makes their case all the stronger.
Schoolmasters and housemasters who have lived in houses provided for them have to make provision for themselves at the least convenient time. They have to acquire a house on a high market when their income is declining, when they have ceased to earn a full income and are trying to live on a pension. The strain on them is all the greater for these reasons. I repeat that I cannot believe that the Financial Secretary will feel able to reject the new Clause.
§ Mr. MacDermot
The hon. Member for Barry (Mr. Gower) under-rates my capacity. The right hon. and learned Member for Huntingdonshire (Sir D. Renton), who moved the new Clause in very moderate terms, said that he was doing so particularly from the standpoint of people in the Armed Forces and the police force. It is significant that there is nothing whatever in the Clause which provides a clue that that was his intention, and I think that he recognised that as the Clause is worded it would go considerably wider. I do not want to 1451 try to take niggling points against him, because he could fairly retort that if his proposal had been confined I could reply that if the principle were right it should be extended more widely, which is the answer that I gave to an agricultural new Clause which was moved earlier today.
I have to stress that when we are in this field of taxation and it is sought to introduce a concession we must consider where it will end, because we must operate on a basis of principle. From the point of view of anyone who is trying to devise a reasonable and fair system of taxation this is the great difficulty in making any kind of concession. The argument today results directly from the fact that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer gave a very generous concession to the home owner, a concession which has been criticised in some quarters as going too far.
As I pointed out in a previous debate, it goes further than the American concession or any concession to home owners under any other capital gains system. The result is that people who have no homes and would like to have homes say that if there is to be a concession for the home owner there ought to be one for them. All that I would point out is that this would be introducing quite a new and different principle.
It is one thing to say that we attach an exemption to a particular type of asset, namely, a person's sole residence. It is quite another to say, "We shall grant an exemption for a certain sum on the realisation of any kind of asset at all provided that the intention is to apply the proceeds to a particular purpose".
If this were done, it would inevitably lead to pressures and arguments for the exemption of the realisation of exactly the same kind of assets, but for different purposes—other quite laudable purposes, charitable purposes, for instance, which one could not criticise in any way. It would be said that we had allowed a man to realise all his securities and the gains on them over a period of 20 years, exempting them if he intended to use them for buying a house; why not grant exemption if he does it for a charitable purpose, to provide for a relative or whatever it might be? Inevitably, we should be led to the position of being 1452 forced to give something which was asked for in Committee, that is, exemption in respect of the first £x of gain, however much it might be—the first £500 of gain, or something like that.
We debated this at length in Committee, and I sought to explain, also at rather great length, what were the objections to that course. What we have done instead is to provide an alternative basis of charge. The right hon. and learned Gentleman, giving the example of a Service man or policeman—for the moment, I forget which—said that, when the time came and he realised his assets to buy a house, he would have to pay 30 per cent. on the proceeds of the sale. That is quite untrue. He has to pay tax not on the proceeds of the sale, but on the gain, the element of capital gain in the proceeds.
It is also not right to say that the ordinary person would pay 30 per cent. What hon. Members opposite seem to have forgotten or failed to realise is that the vast majority of taxpayers will never be liable at the 30 per cent. rate at all. Broadly speaking, particularly if the House accepts Amendments which we have put down for later consideration, it is the Surtax payer who will pay at 30 per cent. This is the point I was trying to make when we had our famous argument about "MacDermot's Law". I said that what was a fair rate of tax—[Laughter.] The hon. Member for Worcester (Mr. Peter Walker) may laugh, but perhaps he will look up the debate and see. I was seeking to point out what would be the fair rate of Capital Gains Tax in comparison with the highest class of Surtax payer; and the 30 per cent. rate, broadly speaking, will be paid by the Surtax payers, and not even by all of them. There will still be quite a number of Surtax payers who will benefit from the alternative basis of charge. Under our proposals, if the House approves them, the broad effect will be that the person whose marginal rate of Income Tax is the standard rate will pay Capital Gains Tax at just over 20 per cent.
I repeat the hope, the rather forlorn hope, that hon. Members opposite will not, in their political zeal, go about spreading quite wrong and unnecessary fears in the minds of the people they are arguing for by suggesting to them that 1453 they will incur a liability to tax far beyond anything for which the Bill provides. Also, perhaps they will remind the people that the Bill applies only to gains from Budget day, another matter which, judging from the queries I have received, seems to be often forgotten.
§ Rear-Admiral Morgan Giles
The hon. and learned Gentleman has been arguing that our proposal would be the thin edge of the wedge. Is it not fairer to say that all we have proposed under the Clause is to be regarded as merely the extension of the already admitted principle of exemption as applied to the sole residence?
§ Mr. MacDermot
That is my point. The moment one concession is made, there are immediate demands for the same concession to be made elsewhere. But we are drawing the line.
It is a tenable position to hold that we have granted an exemption for a particular kind of asset. Once we started on the slope of granting a general exemption for all kinds of assets when used for a particular purpose, we should not be able to distinguish other equally laudable and deserving purposes for which demands would immediately be made.
The argument in the House today has been largely directed to the particular needs of Service men. The hon. and gallant Member for Winchester (Rear-Admiral Morgan Giles) will know that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Defence for the Royal Navy has announced that discussions are in progress with a view to introducing a house purchase scheme within the Navy for the express purpose of assisting recruitment. We are very much alive to these matters.
Once again, we have had the argument about the Service man who spends a lot of his life abroad and then returns to this country and buys a house. I cannot go into details on matters which will be the subject of later debate, but on the Notice Paper there is an Amendment which extends the relief for the owner of an occupied house so that a man who chooses when overseas to make his investment in a house which he can let, can later enjoy the exemption which attaches to that house although he has not been able to live in it because of his service abroad.
§ Mr. MacDermot
That depends on many factors. If hon. Members will look at the Rent Act they will see that one of the grounds for possession of a protected tenancy is that it is required by the owner for his own occupation. If it has been made clear to the tenant at the time of the making of the tenancy that the owner is intending to occupy the house when he completes his service overseas, I cannot see any county court judge refusing him possession.
The answer is that the matters which have been raised in argument in support of the Clause are ones to which we are alive, and that where it is proper and we are able to do so, we have given assistance under the Bill. Other matters are dealt with in other ways. But, for the reasons which I have stated, we cannot accept the Clause.
§ Mr. Peter Walker
The Financial Secretary referred to the possibility of hon. Members on this side of the House, with their political zeal, giving a wrong impression of what the Government are doing in the way of taxation. All I can say is that in pursuit of that zeal I should like to send a copy of the debate to all the people in the Services and police forces.
I did not expect the complacent reply to the debate that we have received from the Financial Secretary. The Clause was tabled in the name of a former Minister at the Home Office who has had considerable experience of the police forces and in the names of two former Service Ministers, and it has been debated in a manner which put quite clearly to the House the very real problems which arise for the people affected. It is not good enough for the Financial Secretary to dismiss the arguments purely on the ground that this is an extension of a concession, or that it meant a new principle.
What the Financial Secretary failed to do was to say how he would assist people with this problem. He is wrong in saying that people overseas can buy a house and let it to somebody and take possession of it when they return. It is almost impossible to obtain a mortgage for a house that one proposes to let. Normally, one can obtain mortgages only for owner-occupation. Therefore, people in the Services going overseas and people in the 1455 police forces with accommodation provided by local authorities do not obtain mortgages to buy houses and then repay the mortgages. They go in for various types of saving, and some of the types will not be affected by capital gains. If they deposit money with a building society no capital gain takes place.
My right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Huntingdonshire (Sir D. Renton) mentioned those who invest in gilt-edged securities and would frequently be advised to do so by their bank managers. Others would invest in local authority securities and some in first-class equities and unit trusts. Over the years these people have been proved to be correct and have had a main defence against inflation. Some people do it by means of life insurance. But the Government are to tax the investments of the life companies at the rate of 35 per cent., irrespective of the means of the individual, and, therefore, that method of saving for house purchase will be less attractive as a result of the provisions of the Bill.
The people wishing to save over a period of years are of many types. They include clergy and also shopkeepers, many of whom live in rented accommodation and, at the end of their careers, move out and want to purchase their own homes. The hon. and learned Gentleman is right in saying that the Clause would apply to everybody. It would apply to young people saving up for the deposit on their homes. Why not? What a very good thing that it should. These young people should realise that we believe that their savings should not be liable to this tax.
The other factor is that those saving up to buy their own houses have to do so in such a way as to protect their savings against inflation. Under the last Labour Government there was 40 per cent. inflation. The price of houses in the last six months has gone up by 5 per cent. There is need for people to find a vehicle for savings that will protect them against inflation. They are now to find that their skilful saving is to be subject to 20 per cent. to 30 per cent. Capital Gains Tax.
This is a human problem. Many of those affected will have spent 20 or 30 1456 years of service overseas. They will be more elderly persons. People in their 50s and 60s find it difficult if not impossible to obtain a mortgage and therefore must find this large amount of money it they are to get a home of their own.
The Clause has been modestly and carefully drawn. The hon. and learned Gentleman did not mention the possible cost of the Clause because he knows that it would be minute. Nevertheless, it would solve a genuine problem for many people. I am surprised at his return to "MacDermot's Law". "MacDermot's Law, Mark II" is an improvement on "MacDermot's Law, Mark I", because that was: the higher the tax the lower the concession.
§ Mr. Walker
Although I would expect the hon. and learned Gentleman to be an expert on "MacDermot's Law" I think that a reading of our proceedings in Committee will convince him that "MacDermot's Law, Mark I" fitted into that principle. Now we have "MacDermot's Attitude", which is probably even worse than "MacDermot's Law".
An earlier attempt to secure a concession for house purchase was rejected on the ground of cost. This attempt to get a concession for a particularly worthy group of people is dismissed, not because it is too expensive, but on the ground that it would embark on a new principle and be a further concession, even though small. The Government's attitude has been miserably mean and I hope that my right hon. and hon. Friends will divide the House in support of the Clause.
§ Mr. Deputy-Speaker (Sir Samuel Storey)
Order. The right hon. and learned Gentleman has exhausted his right to speak.
§ Sir D. Renton
I thought that I had prefaced my remarks with the words, "If I may, by leave of the House", but perhaps you did not hear me, Mr. Deputy-Speaker.
Perhaps I may now, by leave of the House, assure the Financial Secretary, who recently accused me of misleading the House, that I did not intend to do so. When he reads HANSARD tomorrow he will find that I did not. If he consults the White Paper on the Capital Gains Tax he will find that it is categorically
§ stated that it will be a tax of 30 per cent. and we have to take that at its face value.
§ Mr. MacDermot
I cannot let this pass. The right hon. and learned Gentleman cannot merely take one sentence alone. There is to be a basic rate of tax and an alternative charge. The vast majority of taxpayers involved will be taxed on the alternative basis and not on the basic rate.
§ Question put, That the Clause be read a Second time:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 269, Noes 275.1461
|Division No. 236.]||AYES||[8.45 p.m.|
|Agnew, Commander Sir Peter||Curran, Charles||Hobson, Rt. Hn. Sir John|
|Alison, Michael (Barkston Ash)||Currie, G. B. H.||Hooson, H. E.|
|Allan, Robert (Paddington, S.)||Dalkeith, Earl of||Hopkins, Alan|
|Allason, James (Hemel Hempstead)||Dance, James||Hordern, Peter|
|Amery, Rt. Hon. Julian||Davies, Dr. Wyndham (Perry Barr)||Hornby, Richard|
|Anstruther-Gray, Rt. Hn. Sir W.||d'Avigdor-Goldsmid, Sir Henry||Hornsby-Smith, Rt. Hn. Dame P.|
|Astor, John||Dean, Paul||Hutchison, Michael Clark|
|Atkins, Humphrey||Digby, Simon Wingfield||Iremonger, T. L.|
|Awdry, Daniel||Dodds-Parker, Douglas||Irvine, Bryant Godman (Rye)|
|Baker, W. H. K.||Doughty, Charles||Jenkin, Patrick (Woodford)|
|Balniel, Lord||Drayson, G. B.||Jennings, J. C.|
|Barber, Rt. Hn. Anthony||du Cann, Rt. Hn. Edward||Johnson Smith, G. (East Grinstead)|
|Barlow, Sir John||Eden, Sir John||Johnston, Russell (Inverness)|
|Batsford, Brian||Elliot, Capt. Walter (Carshalton)||Jones, Arthur (Northants, S.)|
|Bell, Ronald||Elliott, R. W. (N'c'tle-upon-Tyne, N.)||Jopling, Michael|
|Bennett, Sir Frederic (Torquay)||Emery, Peter||Joseph, Rt. Hn. Sir Keith|
|Berkeley, Humphry||Eyre, Reginald||Kaberry, Sir Donald|
|Berry, Hn, Anthony||Farr, John||Kerby, Capt. Henry|
|Biggs-Davison, John||Fell, Anthony||Kerr, Sir Hamilton (Cambridge)|
|Birch, Rt. Hn. Nigel||Fisher, Nigel||Kershaw, Anthony|
|Black, Sir Cyril||Fletcher-Cooke, Charles (Darwen)||Kilfedder, James A.|
|Blaker, Peter||Fletcher-Cooke, Sir John (S'pton)||Kimball, Marcus|
|Bossom, Hn. Clive||Foster, Sir John||King, Evelyn (Dorset, S.)|
|Bowen, Roderic (Cardigan)||Fraser, Rt. Hn. Hugh (St'fford & Stone)||Kirk, Peter|
|Box, Donald||Fraser, Ian (Plymouth, Sutton)||Kitson, Timothy|
|Boyd-Carpenter, Rt. Hn. J.||Gammans, Lady||Lagden, Godfrey|
|Braine, Bernard||Gibson-Watt, David||Lambton, Viscount|
|Brewis, John||Giles, Rear-Admiral Morgan||Lancaster, Col. C. G.|
|Brinton, Sir Tatton||Gilmour, Ian (Norfolk, Central)||Langford-Holt, Sir John|
|Bromley-Davenport, Lt.-Col. Sir Walter||Gilmour, Sir John (East Fife)||Legge-Bourke, Sir Harry|
|Brooke, Rt. Hn. Henry||Glover, Sir Douglas||Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland)|
|Brown, Sir Edward (Bath)||Glyn, Sir Richard||Litchfield, Capt. John|
|Bruce-Gardyne, J.||Godber, Rt. Hn. J. B.||Lloyd, Rt. Hn. Geoffrey (Sut'n C'dfield)|
|Bryan, Paul||Goodhart, Philip||Lloyd, Ian (P'tsm'th, Langstone)|
|Buchanan-Smith, Alick||Goodhew, Victor||Longden, Gilbert|
|Bullus, Sir Eric||Gower, Raymond||Loveys, Walter H.|
|Burden, F. A.||Grant, Anthony||Lubbock, Eric|
|Butcher, Sir Herbert||Grant-Ferris, R.||Lucas, Sir Jocelyn|
|Buxton, Ronald||Gresham Cooke, R.||McAdden, Sir Stephen|
|Campbell, Gordon||Griffiths, Eldon (Bury St. Edmunds)||MacArthur, Ian|
|Carlisle, Mark||Griffiths, Peter (Smethwick)||Mackenzie, Alasdair (Ross & Crom'ty)|
|Carr, Rt. Hn. Robert||Gurden, Harold||Mackie, George Y. (C'ness & S'land)|
|Cary, Sir Robert||Hall, John (Wycombe)||McLaren, Martin|
|Channon, H. P. G.||Hall-Davis, A. G. F.||Maclean, Sir Fitzroy|
|Chataway, Christopher||Hamilton, Marquess of (Fermanagh)||Macleod, Rt. Hn. Iain|
|Chichester-Clark, R.||Hamilton, M. (Salisbury)||McMaster, Stanley|
|Clark, Henry (Antrim, N.)||Harris, Frederic (Croydon, N. W.)||McNair-Wilson, Patrick|
|Clark, William (Nottingham, S.)||Harris, Reader (Heston)||Maginnis, John E.|
|Clarke, Brig. Terence (Portsmth, W.)||Harrison, Brian (Maldon)||Maitland, Sir John|
|Cole, Norman||Harvey, Sir Arthur Vere (Macclesf'd)||Marten, Neil|
|Cooke, Robert||Harvey, John (Walthamstow, E.)||Mathew, Robert|
|Cooper, A. E.||Harvie Anderson, Miss||Maude, Angus|
|Cooper-Key, Sir Neill||Hastings, Stephen||Maudling, Rt. Hn. Reginald|
|Corfield, F. V.||Hawkins, Paul||Maxwell-Hyslop, R. J.|
|Costain, A. P.||Hay, John||Maydon, Lt.-Cmdr. S. L. C.|
|Courtney, Cdr. Anthony||Heald, Rt. Hn. Sir Lionel||Meyer, Sir Anthony|
|Craddock, Sir Beresford (Spelthorne)||Heath, Rt. Hn. Edward||Mills, Peter (Torrington)|
|Crawley, Aidan||Hendry, Forbes||Mills, Stratton (Belfast, N.)|
|Crosthwaite-Eyre, Col. Sir Oliver||Higgins, Terence L.||Miscampbell, Norman|
|Crowder, F. P.||Hill, J. E. B. (S. Norfolk)||Mitchell, David|
|Cunningham, Sir Knox||Hirst, Geoffrey||Monro, Hector|
|Morrison, Charles (Devizes)||Rees-Davies, W. R.||Turton, Rt. Hn. R. H.|
|Mott-Radclyffe, Sir Charles||Renton, Rt. Hn. Sir David||Tweedsmuir, Lady|
|Munro-Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh||Ridley, Hn. Nicholas||van Straubenzee, W. R.|
|Murton, Oscar||Ridsdale, Julian||Vaughan-Morgan, Rt. Hn. Sir John|
|Neave, Airey||Roberts, Sir Peter (Heeley)||Vickers, Dame Joan|
|Nicholson, Sir Godfrey||Rodgers, Sir John (Sevenoaks)||Walder, David (High Peak)|
|Noble, Rt. Hn. Michael||Roots, William||Walker, Peter (Worcester)|
|Nugent, Rt. Hn. Sir Richard||St. John-Stevas, Norman||Walker-Smith, Rt. Hn. Sir Derek|
|Onslow, Cranley||Sandys, Rt. Hn. D.||Wall, Patrick|
|Orr, Capt. L. P. S.||Scott-Hopkins, James||Walters, Dennis|
|Orr-Ewing, Sir Ian||Sharples, Richard||Ward, Dame Irene|
|Osborn, John (Hallam)||Shepherd, William||Weatherill, Bernard|
|Osborne, Sir Cyril (Louth)||Sinclair, Sir George||Webster, David|
|Page, John (Harrow, W.)||Smyth, Rt. Hn. Brig. Sir John||Wells, John (Maidstone)|
|Page, R. Graham (Crosby)||Spearman, Sir Alexander||Whitelaw, William|
|Pearson, Sir Frank (Clitheroe)||Speir, Sir Rupert||Williams, Sir Rolf Dudley (Exeter)|
|Peel, John||Stainton, Keith||Wills, Sir Gerald (Bridgwater)|
|Percival, Ian||Stanley, Hn. Richard||Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)|
|Peyton, John||Steel, David (Roxburgh)||Wise, A. R.|
|Pickthorn, Rt. Hn. Sir Kenneth||Studholme, Sir Henry||Wolrige-Gordon, Patrick|
|Pike, Miss Mervyn||Talbot, John E.||Wood, Rt. Hn. Richard|
|Pitt, Dame Edith||Taylor, Sir Charles (Eastbourne)||Woodhouse, Hn. Christopher|
|Pounder, Rafton||Taylor, Edward M. (G'gow, Cathcart)||Woodnutt, Mark|
|Powell, Rt. Hn. J. Enoch||Teeling, Sir William||Wylie, N. R.|
|Price, David (Eastleigh)||Temple, John M.||Yates, William (The Wrekin)|
|Prior, J. M. L.||Thatcher, Mrs. Margaret||Younger, Hn. George|
|Pym, Francis||Thomas, Sir Leslie (Canterbury)|
|Quennell, Miss J. M.||Thompson, Sir Richard (Croydon, S.)||TELLERS FOR THE AYES:|
|Ramsden, Rt. Hn. James||Tiley, Arthur (Bradford, W.)||Mr. More and Mr. Dudley Smith.|
|Redmayne, Rt. Hn. Sir Martin||Tilney, John (Wavertree)|
|Abse, Leo||Driberg, Tom||Howarth, Harry (Wellingborough)|
|Albu, Austen||Duffy, Dr. A. E. P.||Howarth, Robert L. (Bolton, E.)|
|Allaun, Frank (Salford, E.)||Dunn, James A.||Howell, Denis (Small Heath)|
|Alldritt, Walter||Dunnett, Jack||Hoy, James|
|Atkinson, Norman||Edelman, Maurice||Hughes, Cledwyn (Anglesey)|
|Bacon, Miss Alice||Edwards, Robert (Bilston)||Hughes, Emrys (S. Ayrshire)|
|Bagier, Gordon A. T.||English, Michael||Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.)|
|Barnett, Joel||Ennals, David||Hunter, Adam (Dunfermline)|
|Baxter, William||Ensor, David||Hunter, A. E. (Feltham)|
|Bence, Cyril||Evans, Albert (Islington, S. W.)||Hynd, H. (Accrington)|
|Bennett, J. (Glasgow, Bridgeton)||Evans, Ioan (Birmingham, Yardley)||Irving, Sydney (Dartford)|
|Binns, John||Fernyhough, E.||Jackson, Colin|
|Bishop, E. S.||Finch, Harold (Bedwellty)||Janner, Sir Barnett|
|Blackburn, F.||Fitch, Alan (Wigan)||Jay, Rt. Hn. Douglas|
|Blenkinsop, Arthur||Fletcher, Ted (Darlington)||Jeger, George (Goole)|
|Boardman, H.||Fletcher, Raymond (Ilkeston)||Jeger, Mrs. Lena (H'b'n & St. P'cras, S.)|
|Boston, T. G.||Floud, Bernard||Jenkins, Hugh (Putney)|
|Bottomley, Rt. Hn. Arthur||Foley, Maurice||Jenkins, Rt. Hn. Roy (Stechford)|
|Bowden, Rt. Hn. H. W. (Leics S. W.)||Foot, Sir Dingle (Ipswich)||Johnson, Carol (Lewisham, S.)|
|Braddock, Mrs. E. M.||Foot, Michael (Ebbw Vale)||Johnson, James (K'ston-on-Hull, W.)|
|Bradley, Tom||Ford, Ben||Jones, Dan (Burnley)|
|Bray, Dr. Jeremy||Fraser, Rt. Hn. Tom (Hamilton)||Jones, Rt. Hn. Sir Elwyn (W. Ham, S.)|
|Brown, Hugh D. (Glasgow, Provan)||Freeson, Reginald||Jones, J. Idwal (Wrexham)|
|Buchan, Norman (Renfrewshire, W.)||Galpern, Sir Myer||Jones, T. W. (Merioneth)|
|Buchanan, Richard||Garrett, W. E.||Kelley, Richard|
|Butler, Herbert (Hackney, C.)||George, Lady Megan Lloyd||Kenyon, Clifford|
|Butler, Mrs. Joyce (Wood Green)||Ginsburg, David||Kerr, Mrs. Anne (R'ter & Chatham)|
|Callaghan, Rt. Hn. James||Gourlay, Harry||Kerr, Dr. David (W'worth, Central)|
|Carmichael, Neil||Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Anthony||Lawson, George|
|Chapman, Donald||Gregory, Arnold||Leadbitter, Ted|
|Coleman, Donald||Grey, Charles||Ledger, Ron|
|Conlan, Bernard||Griffiths, David (Rother Valley)||Lee, Miss Jennie (Cannock)|
|Corbet, Mrs. Freda||Griffiths, Rt. Hn. James (Llanelly)||Lever, Harold (Cheetham)|
|Cousins, Rt. Hn. Frank||Griffiths, Will (M'chester, Exchange)||Lever, L. M. (Ardwick)|
|Craddock, George (Bradford, S.)||Gunter, Rt. Hn. R. J.||Lewis, Arthur (West Ham, N.)|
|Crawshaw, Richard||Hale, Leslie||Lewis, Ron (Carlisle)|
|Cronin, John||Hamilton, James (Bothwell)||Lipton, Marcus|
|Crosland, Rt. Hn. Anthony||Hamilton, William (West Fife)||Loughlin, Charles|
|Crossman, Rt. Hn. R. H. S.||Hamling, William (Woolwich, W.)||Mabon, Dr. J. Dickson|
|Cullen, Mrs. Alice||Hannan, William||McBride, Neil|
|Dalyell, Tam||Harper, Joseph||McCann, J.|
|Darling, George||Harrison, Walter (Wakefield)||MacColl, James|
|Davies, Ifor (Gower)||Hart, Mrs. Judith||MacDermot, Niall|
|Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)||Hazell, Bert||McGuire, Michael|
|de Freitas, Sir Geoffrey||Heffer, Eric S.||McInnes, James|
|Delargy, Hugh||Henderson, Rt. Hn. Arthur||McKay, Mrs. Margaret|
|Dell, Edmund||Herbison, Rt. Hn. Margaret||Mackenzie, Gregor (Rutherglen)|
|Dempsey, James||Hobden, Dennis (Brighton, K'town)||McLeavy, Frank|
|Diamond, Rt. Hn. John||Holman, Percy||Mahon, Peter (Preston, S.)|
|Dodds, Norman||Horner, John||Mahon, Simon (Bootle)|
|Doig, Peter||Houghton, Rt. Hn. Douglas||Mallalieu, J. P. W. (Huddersfield, E.)|
|Manuel, Archie||Pentland, Norman||Swain, Thomas|
|Mapp, Charles||Perry, Ernest G.||Swingler, Stephen|
|Marsh, Richard||Popplewell, Ernest||Symonds, J. B.|
|Mason, Roy||Prentice, R. E.||Taverne, Dick|
|Maxwell, Robert||Price, J. T. (Westhoughton)||Taylor, Bernard (Mansfield)|
|Mayhew, Christopher||Probert, Arthur||Thomas, George (Cardiff, W.)|
|Mellish, Robert||Pursey, Cmdr. Harry||Thomas, Iorwerth (Rhondda, W.)|
|Mendelson, J. J.||Randall, Harry||Thomson, George (Dundee, E.)|
|Mikardo, Ian||Rankin, John||Thornton, Ernest|
|Millan, Bruce||Redhead, Edward||Tinn, James|
|Miller, Dr. M. S.||Rees, Merlyn||Tomney, Frank|
|Milne, Edward (Blyth)||Rhodes, Geoffrey||Tuck, Raphael|
|Molloy, William||Richard, Ivor||Urwin, T. W.|
|Monslow, Walter||Roberts, Albert (Normanton)||Varley, Eric G.|
|Morris, Charles (Openshaw)||Roberts, Goronwy (Caernarvon)||Walden, Brian (All Saints)|
|Morris, John (Aberavon)||Robertson, John (Paisley)||Walker, Harold (Doncaster)|
|Mulley, Rt. Hn. Frederick (Sheffield Pk)||Robinson, Rt. Hn. K. (St. Pancras, N.)||Wallace, George|
|Murray, Albert||Rodgers, William (Stockton)||Warbey, William|
|Neal, Harold||Rogers, George (Kensington, N.)||Watkins, Tudor|
|Newens, Stan||Rose, Paul B.||Weitzman, David|
|Noel-Baker, Francis (Swindon)||Ross, Rt. Hn. William||Wells, William (Walsall, N.)|
|Noel-Baker, Rt. Hn. Philip (Derby, S.)||Rowland, Christopher||White, Mrs. Eirene|
|Norwood, Christopher||Sheldon, Robert||Whitlock, William|
|Oakes, Gordon||Shinwell, Rt. Hn. E.||Wigg, Rt. Hn. George|
|Ogden, Eric||Shore, Peter (Stepney)||Wilkins, W. A.|
|O'Malley, Brian||Short, Rt. Hn. E. (N'c'tle-on-Tyne, C.)||Willey, Rt. Hn. Frederick|
|Oram, Albert E. (E. Ham, S.)||Short, Mrs. Renée (W'hampton, N. E.)||Williams, Alan (Swansea, W.)|
|Orbach, Maurice||Silkin, John (Deptford)||Williams, Clifford (Abertillery)|
|Orme, Stanley||Silkin, S. C. (Camberwell, Dulwich)||Williams, Mrs. Shirley (Hitchin)|
|Oswald, Thomas||Silverman, Julius (Aston)||Williams, W. T. (Warrington)|
|Owen, Will||Silverman, Sydney (Nelson)||Willis, George (Edinburgh, E.)|
|Padley, Walter||Skeffington, Arthur||Wilson, William (Coventry, S.)|
|Page, Derek (King's Lynn)||Small, William||Winterbottom, R. E.|
|Paget, R. T.||Snow, Julian||Woodburn, Rt. Hn. A.|
|Palmer, Arthur||Soskice, Rt. Hn. Sir Frank||Woof, Robert|
|Pannell, Rt. Hn. Charles||Steele, Thomas (Dunbartonshire, W.)||Wyatt, Woodrow|
|Pargiter, G. A.||Stewart, Rt. Hn. Michael||Yates, Victor (Ladywood)|
|Park, Trevor (Derbyshire, S. E.)||Stonehouse, John||Zilliacus, K.|
|Parker, John||Stones, William|
|Parkin, B. T.||Strauss, Rt. Hn. G. R. (Vauxhall)||TELLERS FOR THE NOES:|
|Pavitt, Laurence||Stross, Sir Barnett (Stoke-on-Trent, C.)||Mr. Howie and Mrs. Slater.|
|Pearson, Arthur (Pontypridd)||Summerskill, Hn. Dr. Shirley|