§
Amendments made: No. 38, in page 37, line 27, at end insert:
and
(b) any proposal to exercise his power to revoke a licence under section (Revocation of licence on failure to comply with welfare amenity scheme) of this Act".
§ No. 39, in line 32, after "appeal", insert "or objection".—[Mrs. Shirley Williams.]
§ Mrs. Shirley WilliamsI beg to move Amendment No. 40, in page 38, line 37, leave out first "the" and insert "any such." 598 This Amendment merely brings the wording into line with the rest of the subsection.
§ Mr. RidleyI think that this Amendment should be made in line 38, and not in line 37. Line 37 has in it only the word "inquiry", and I do not quite see how one can leave out the first "the" from a line containing only that one word. We on this side would be delighted to facilitate any means by which the Amendment could be made in the right line, whichever line that may be.
§ 11.15 p.m.
§ Mrs. Shirley WilliamsI am a little confused because my copy of the Bill reads at page 38, line 37;
relation to the inquiry from all or any of the following".
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerThe Amendment on the Notice Paper is correct.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mrs. Shirley WilliamsI beg to move Amendment No. 41, in page 39, line 8, at the end to insert:
(7) Any person who without reasonable excuse fails to comply with any requirement imposed by regulations made by virtue of paragraph (c), (d) or (e) of the last foregoing subsection shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding £50 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or both.This Amendment merely brings the whole Clause into line with objections raised by the Council on Tribunals on the penalties for failing to comply with regulations in proceedings for inquiries. It provides comparable penalties to the normal penalties in this type of inquiry.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. Ian Lloyd (Portsmouth, Langstone)I beg to move Amendment No. 42, in page 39, line 19, at the end to insert:
(9) The Minister shall not authorise the recovery of any expenses incurred by him as a result of an inquiry held under this section from the persons appearing at the inquiry or any appellant or objector, either where the appeal or objection has been successful or where, in his opinion, despite the failure of the appeal or objection, a substantial defence has been made by either appellant or objector.I do not need to detain the House for very long on this Amendment, which deals with a simple point. The Bill makes provision for appraisal, review 599 and inquiry. It is clearly in the mind of the Government to establish standards in the industry and also to see that these standards when introduced should be maintained and upheld. In Clause 49 there is anticipation that there will be disputes over the performance of these standards and it rightly and properly provides for appeals to a tribunal. As we on this side of the House see the situation, this inhibits appeals by giving the Minister what appears to he unlimited power to award costs. This would have a strong deterrent effect on those who might be tempted to take a case to a tribunal inquiry. The Amendment would discourage frivolous appeals but it would ensure that no port employer should be discouraged from appeal by the possibility of a heavy bill for costs when he had a genuine defence.
§ Mr. SwinglerWe all sympathise with the hon. Member's motive in this Amendment, but there has been this provision ever since 1933. This is a characteristic provision under Section 290(4) of the Local Government Act, 1933, and it is normally incorporated in similar circumstances in Bills where such inquiries are provided for to give the Minister absolute discretion to recover costs.
The general practice of Ministers for some time has been to recover such expenses only in rare cases. There is a minor error in the Amendment. It refers to "substantial defence". In these cases, no one will be, as it were, on trial. One should use the words, "a reasonable case has been made". My right hon. Friend and Ministers generally will, I am sure, continue the practice that only in rare cases where it is clear that there has been a waste of time will the power to recover costs be utilised.
Not in relation to this Bill, but in general terms, the Government are considering a general recommendation to the Council on Tribunals on this type of provision.
§ Mr. LloydIn view of the explanation given by the Parliamentary Secretary, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.