HC Deb 24 January 1967 vol 739 cc1328-41
Mr. Freeson

I beg to move Amendment No. 98, in pave 29, line 1, after 'specified' to insert 'and'.

Before the Bill went into Committee, Clause 36(1), then Clause 34(1), provided for the Minister to collect certain information from Schedule 1 companies, their subsidiaries, any person with property or rights owned on or since 4th November, 1964, by a Schedule 1 company or its subsidiary and every other iron and steel producer.

In Committee, the Government accepted an Opposition Amendment to remove the last group of persons—other iron and steel producers—from the list of those subject to this obligation. The list was shortened by one and it therefore became necessary to insert the word 'and' before the new last item in the list. That is what the Amendment does.

Amendment agreed to.

6.15 p.m.

Mr. Barber

I beg to move Amendment No. 145, in page 29, line 28, after 'such' to insert 'iron and steel'.

The two Amendments which are being taken with this, Amendment No. 146, in page 29, line 31, after 'notice', insert: '(being not less than 28 days)' and Amendment No. 147, in page 26, line 31, after 'periodically', insert: '(at intervals of not less than six months)' are self-explanatory and I need say no more about them. However, I must explain the purpose of Amendment No. 145, which, although superficially of a minor character, is of considerable significance.

Under Clause 36(2), which the Amendment seeks to amend, the Minister has power to obtain from the 200 smaller iron and steel companies which are to remain in private enterprise details of their output and of their capacity not only of iron and steel products, but of anything else which they manufacture, either at present, or as a result of diversification at any time in future.

Whether the Minister should have this power to obtain details of output and capacity of iron and steel products is open to argument and we have already considered that question, but there can be no justification whatever for the Minister taking power to obtain commercially secret information about products which have absolutely nothing to do with iron and steel.

Over the years, many of the 200 private enterprise companies will diversify their activities and it would be an outrageous imposition for the Minister to take power to obtain information from the private sector about products which are wholly divorced from the iron and steel industry. Yet, under the Bill as drafted, the Minister is seeking just that power and, what is more, any person who declines to comply with the Minister's request will be liable to a criminal prosecution. For those reasons, I hope that the Minister will think that this is an error in the Bill and will consequently accept the Amendment.

Mr, John H. Osborn (Sheffield, Hallam)

I hope that the Minister will accept the Amendment. I cannot believe that he wants to have details of the diversified activities of the steel companies in the private sector.

I have been considering some of the activities of the steel companies in Sheffield, for instance. I am certain that he does not want to know about the ramifications of Jessop-Saville which is a member of the B.S.A. group. There is a well-known company making hand tools and garden tools and other engineering equipment, Spear & Jackson Ltd., which is also a steel manufacturer and I am certain that the Minister does not want to know anything about those activities of that company.

Another well-known company in Sheffield is Edgar Allen whose products range from butt-welded tools to cement machinery—it is engaged in making rotary dryers, electro magnetic chucks and pulverised fuel equipment and has diversified into fans and other equipment for the ventilation of mines. I am certain that the Minister would want to know details only of its steel making activities. Balfour Darwins products include tools and permanent magnets as well as alloy castings. Another well-known company is James Neill and I am certain that the Minister would want to know no details other than about its steel making in its subsidiary, Hallomshire Steel. My own company ventures into fabrications, the manufacture of steel castings, steel extrusions and small tools. Again, I assume that the Minister wants details of iron and steel products only.

The object of the Amendment is to make certain that the Minister will obtain details only of the iron and steel making activities. I sincerely hope that he will accept the Amendment which is in keeping with the views which he has expressed in Committee and on Report. I can see no justification for not accepting it.

Mr. Freeson

The Amendment is acceptable. The Minister needs power to collect forecasts about the private sector's output of and capacity to produce iron and steel products because the development of the steel industry needs to be looked at as a whole and therefore he will need to know about the private sector's plans in assessing the Corporation's development plans under Section 4(2) of the 1949 Act revived. He will also need the information in connection with his control of the private sector's own development under Clause 13. These considerations arise from the special circumstances of the iron and steel industry and do not apply to products other than iron and steel products. It had always been intended that the Minister's power should be used only to collect forecasts relating to iron and steel products.

The other Amendment briefly touched on by the right hon. Member for Altrincham and Sale (Mr. Barber), Nos. 146 and 147, are not acceptable.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Marsh

I beg to move Amendment No. 99, in page 29, line 32, at the beginning to insert: 'Subject to subsection (6A) below'. This Amendment and Amendment No. 100 are purely paving Amendments for Amendment No. 101, which limits the Corporation's power under subsections (3) and (4) of Clause 36 to collect information from representative organisations of the iron and steel industry and persons providing common services for iron and steel producers to a period until two years from vesting date. The Amendment is a pure formality.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: No. 100, in page 29, line 43, at beginning insert: 'Subject to subsection (6A) below'.—[Mr. Marsh.]

Mr. Patrick Jenkin

I beg to move Amendment No. 148, in page 30, line 12, after ' officer ' to insert: 'having control of such organisation's records'. This is a very narrow point but one which I believe the Government will consider with sympathy.

The obligation is placed on companies to make their records available to the Corporation for the purposes of the reorganisation of the steel industry. This obligation is subject to penalties which can be very severe— a fine not exceeding £50. or in the case of a second or subsequent conviction…a fine not exceeding £200. The only person who should be subject to the liability to pay fines is any officer of the company who is responsible for the records which will have been called for by the notice served under subsection (3). To provide that the notice may be served on such officer of the organisation as appears to the Corporation to be appropriate might lead the Corporation to serve a notice on somebody who was inappropriate and who therefore might subsequently find himself subject to these penalities in circumstances in which he could do very little about it. It would not be difficult for the Corporation to select the right person on whom the notice should be served. In normal circumstances, in the case of a limited liability company, this is the secretary of the company.

As I say, this is a narrow point, but since penal sanctions are involved we should specify clearly the nature of the person on whom the notice should be served and who, therefore, would become liable to the sanctions.

Mr. Freeson

Certainly the normal procedure would be for such notices to be served on the secretaries of the organisations in question, but I am advised that the Amendment cannot be accepted because the Corporation would not necessarily know who had control of the organisation's records and might have no means of finding out with certainty. It would clearly be sufficient if it were to serve the notice on a responsible officer such as the secretary of the organisation.

There is some uncertainty about the meaning of the expression officer having control of such organisation's records". It might be taken to mean a servant of the organisation concerned with records but not with general policy and who had no general power of decision. The Corporation would want to impose a requirement on those with a general responsibility for the running of the organisation and not just those responsible for records to whom such responsibility would have been delegated. The normal procedure probably would be for the secretary of the organisation to receive such a notice.

Because of the difficulties which I have indicated on what has been said to be a narrow point, I ask hon. Members not to press the Amendment.

Mr. Patrick Jenkin

I understand the hon. Gentleman's point. However, it still seems possible that in the case of a trade association or something of that sort which the Clause covers there might be, through inadvertence or unawareness of the problem, a notice served on, say, a chairman who is chairman for only a year, or a president, or someone who holds a rotating office of that sort who does not have control at all. It is not unreasonable that the Statute should give an indication of the nature of the officer on whom notice should be served.

However, the Parliamentary Secretary said that he recognises that it is the intention that it should be the secretary or director-general, or somebody of that sort, on whom the notice should be served. If he would say that he will consider between now and the Bill going to another place whether it would be appropriate to indicate this, we would not feel it necessary to press the Amendment.

Mr. Freeson

Without commitment, we shall consider very carefully what the hon. Gentleman has said.

Mr. Jenkin

I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment proposed: No. 101, in page 30, line 13, at the end to insert: (6A) No notice shall be served by the Corporation under subsection (3) or subsection (4) above after the expiration of the period of twenty-four months beginning with the vesting date.—[Mr. Freeson]

Mr. Speaker

We can consider at the same time the Amendment to the Amendment in the name of the hon. Member for Wanstead and Woodford (Mr. Patrick Jenkin), to leave out "twenty-four" and insert "twelve".

Mr. Michael Shaw (Scarborough and Whitby)

I should say a word of thanks to the Minister for introducing this Amendment as it goes a long way to meeting our fear that there seemed to be no time limit on when the notice could be served. Our only worry is whether the time limit is still of too great a duration. Many things can happen in 24 months, and one would have thought that the Corporation should have made up its mind about the type of information which it wanted a good deal quicker than in 24 months. However, we are grateful that a time limit has been imposed, and we are prepared to accept the Amendment in that spirit.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. W. R. van Straubenzee (Wokingham)

I beg to move Amendment No. 149, in page 30, line 16, to leave out from "shall" to "be" in line 17 and to insert: if it is proved that he had no reasonable excuse". This is a very short, simple and, I trust, non-controversial Amendment. On the last occasion on which I had the pleasure of addressing the Parliamentary Secretary, he saw the point which I sought to put to him very quickly, and therefore I am sure that I shall not have to labour the argument on this Amendment. I hope that as we draw to the end of our lengthy discussions on Report he is in responsive mood.

Let me remind the hon. Gentleman, since he comes comparatively freshly to the discussions, that in brief this matter concerns the onus of proof, and particularly the onus of proof on a person who fails to satisfy the obligation imposed by the Clause.

6.30 p.m.

I do not need to tell the Parliamentary Secretary that the provisions of Clause 36 are very extensive. I know they have been whittled down in part as a result of persuasive argument in Standing Committee, but the fact remains that under subsection (7) A person who fails to satisfy an obligation .. shall, unless he proves that he had reasonable excuse for the failure, be guilty of an offence. I want to say quite clearly to the Parliamentary Secretary that those words are totally unacceptable to us on this side of the House.

A person who is facing the penalties laid down in Clause 36, and under that subsection in particular, is placed in the position of having to prove that he has reasonable excuse for the failure, and that is quite unacceptable to us. That is why in our Amendment we reverse the order, so that it has to be proved that he had no reasonable excuse. I would have hoped that this point would not need elaborating, certainly at this hour. The Minister, in Committee, has already shown himself to be susceptible to argument on this. There are very major ramifications here; there are very extensive matters which are required to be produced; there are very extensive duties laid upon the persons who are covered by this Clause. It surely does not seem reasonable that such a person should stand accused, as it were, by the words of subsection (7) as they stand at present.

It is a short, simple and reasonable Amendment, and I confidently expect the Parliamentary Secretary to be able to accept it.

Mr. Freeson

This is the kind of Amendment which I personally and, I am sure, all of us, would wish to support if it were possible to do so, because one sees the motivation of the remarks of the hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. van Straubenzee) and his Amendment. Normally, of course, it is right that a person liable to a penalty should not have the burden of proof of innocence placed upon him, but, unfortunately, in this case no other way, I am advised, would be workable; no other arrangement could be adopted which would be effective.

Nobody except the person involved would have sufficient knowledge of the circumstances to be able to prove the case one way or another. No other person would be in the position to give the information required of him; it could not be collected and would be impossible to collect. Nobody else would be able to prove this, because nobody else would know whether the information was in fact available.

There is another point. The requirements likely to be imposed under Clause 36 are straightforward and very factual. Whether or not any person has met them is not a question requiring a balance of probabilities, or, indeed, a question of right or wrong; it would be solely a factual matter. Normally, it would be quite obvious whether a person involved had complied with the obligations imposed on him.

Division No. 249.] AYES [6.36 p.m.
Abse, Leo Barnett, Joel Bowden, Rt. Hn. Herbert
Albu, Austen Bellenger, Rt. Hn. F. J. Boyden, James
Allaun, Frank (Salford, E.) Bence, Cyril Braddock, Mrs. E. M.
Alldritt, Walter Benn, Rt. Hn. Anthony Wedgwood Bradley, Tom
Allen, Scholefield Bennett, James (G'gow, Bridgeton) Bray, Dr. Jeremy
Anderson, Donald Bidwell, Sydney Brooks, Edwin
Archer, Peter Binns, John Brown, Hugh D. (G'gow, Provan)
Armstrong, Ernest Blackburn, F. Brown, Bob (N'c'tle-upon-Tyne, W.)
Atkins, Ronald (Preston, N.) Boardman, H. Buchan, Norman
Atkinson, Norman (Tottenham) Booth, Albert Butler, Herbert (Hackney, C.)
Bacon, Rt. Hn. Alice Boston, Terence Cant, R. B.
Bagier, Gordon A. T. Bottomley, Rt. Hn. Arthur Carmichael, Neil

It is for the reasons which I have briefly stated, and not in any spirit of antagonism at all to the motivation here, that I hope that the Amendment will be not pressed.

Mr. van Straubenzee

The Parliamentary Secretary will, I hope, forgive me for saying that he has not really applied his very considerable faculties to this case in the way I think it deserves. He took refuge in rather vague advice that there is no other way of encompassing the object of the Amendment. Of course, from the point of view of the Government this is the very much more convenient way of doing it—placing the onus of proof this way round, on the suspected person. It always will be.

If I understood him aright, he argued that it would be impossible to prove whether the person had or had not produced the evidence required, but, after all, the Government have got first to be satisfied that that person has failed in his obligations. They have to have this information, anyway. They have to be certain that there is a prima facie case before they start. They will be in a position very well to judge whether the person had any reasonable excuse, and they should accept the onus of proof.

I am afraid that I must say quite definitely that the Government argument is merely on convenience and expediency, and I think there is a considerable point of principle here. It is only out of deference to the hour that I do not argue it further. I hope that my hon. and right hon. Friends will support me, for I have no intention whatever of withdrawing the Amendment.

Question put, That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill:—

The House divided: Ayes 271, Noes 214.

Carter-Jones, Lewis Jackson, Colin (B'h'ae & Spenb'gh) Perry, George H. (Nottingham, S.)
Castle, Rt. Hn. Barbara Jackson, Peter M. (High Peak) Prentice, Rt. Hn. R. E.
Chapman, Donald Janner, Sir Barnett Price, Christopher (Perry Barr)
Coe, Denis Jay, Rt. Hn. Douglas Price, Thomas (Westhoughton)
Coleman, Donald Jeger, Mrs. Lena (H'b'n&St. P'Cras, S.) Price, William (Rugby)
Concannon, J. D. Jenkins, Hugh (Putney) Probert, Arthur
Conlan, Bernard Jenkins, Rt. Hn. Roy (Stechford) Randall, Harry
Corbet, Mrs. Freda Johnson, Carol (Lewiaham, S.) Rankin, John
Craddock, George (Bradford, S.) Jones, Dan (Burnley) Redhead, Edward
Crawshaw, Richard Jones, Rt. Hn. SirElwyn (W. Ham, S.) Reynolds, G. W.
Cronin, John Jones, J. Idwal (Wrexham) Rhodes, Geoffrey
Crossman, Rt. Hn. Richard Judd, Frank Richard, Ivor
Cullen, Mrs. Alice Kenyon, Clifford Roberts, Albert (Normanton)
Dalyell, Tam Kerr, Dr. David (W'worth, Central) Roberts, Goronwy (Caernarvon)
Davidson, Arthur (Accrington) Lawson, George Robertson, John (Paisley)
Davies, Dr. Ernest (Stretford) Ledger, Ron Robinson, Rt. Hn. Kenneth (St. P'c'as)
Davies, Harold (Leek) Lestor, Miss Loan Robinson, W. O. J. (Walth'stow, E.)
Davies, Robert (Cambridge) Lever, Harold (Cheetham) Rodgers, William (Stockton)
Delargy, Hugh Lewis, Arthur (W. Ham, N.) Rogers, George (Kensington, N.)
Dewar, Donald Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) Rose, Paul
Diamond, Rt. Hn. John Lipton, Marcus Ross, Rt. Hn. William
Dickens, James Lomas, Kenneth Rowland, Christopher (Meriden)
Dobson, Ray Loughlin, Charles Rowlands, E. (Cardiff, N.)
Doig, Peter Luard, Evan Ryan, John
Driberg, Tom Lyon, Alexander W. (York) Shaw, Arnold (Ilford, S.)
Dunn, James A. Lyons, Edward (Bradford, E.) Sheldon, Robert
Dunnett, Jack McBride, Neil Shinwell, Rt. Hn. E.
Dunwoody, Mrs. Gwyneth (Exeter) McCann, John Shore, Peter (Stepney)
Dunwoody, Dr. John (F'th & G'b'e) MacColl, James Short, Rt. Hn. Edward (N'c'tle-u-Tyne)
Eadie, Alex MacDermot, Niall Short, Mrs. Renée (W'hampton, N. E.)
Edwards, Rt. Hn. Ness (Caerphilly) Macdonald, A. H. Silkin, Rt. Hn. John (Deptford)
Edwards, William (Merioneth) McGuire, Michael Silverman, Julius (Aston)
Ellis, John McKay, Mrs. Margaret Silverman, Sydney (Nelson)
English, Michael Mackenzie, Gregor (Rutherglen) Slater, Joseph
Ennals, David Mackintosh, John P. Small, William
Ensor, David Maclennan, Robert Snow, Julian
Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W.) McMillan, Tom (Glasgow, C.) Spriggs, Leslie
Evans, Ioan L. (Birm'h'm, Yardley) McNamara, J. Kevin Steel, Thomas (Dunbartonshire, W.)
Finch, Harold MacPherson, Malcolm Stewart, Rt. Hn. Michael
Fletcher, Raymond (Ilkeston) Mahon, Peter (Preston, S.) Stonehouse, John
Fletcher, Ted (Darlington) Mahon, Simon (Bootle) Strauss, Rt. Hn. G. R.
Foley, Maurice Mallalieu, E. L. (Brigg) Swain, Thomas
Foot, Michael (Ebbw Vale) Mallalieu, J. P. W.(Huddersfield, E.) Swingler, Stephen
Ford, Ben Mapp, Charles Taverne, Dick
Forrester, John Marquand, David Thomson, Rt. Hn. George
Fowler, Gerry Marsh, Rt. Hn. Richard Thornton, Ernest
Fraser, John (Norwood) Mason, Roy Tinn, James
Freeson, Reginald Mayhew, Christopher Tomney, Frank
Gardner, Tony Mellish, Robert Tuck, Raphael
Garrett, W. E. Mendelson, J. J. Urwin, T. W.
Ginsburg, David Mikardo, Ian Varley, Eric G.
Gray, Dr. Hugh (Yarmouth) Millan, Bruce Wainwright, Edwin (Dearne Valley)
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Anthony Milne, Edward (Blyth) Walker, Harold (Doncaster)
Gregory, Arnold Mitchell, R. C. (S'th'pton, Test) Wallace, George
Grey, Charles (Durham) Molloy, William Watkins, David (Consett)
Griffiths, David (Rother Valley) Moonman, Eric Watkins, Tudor (Brecon & Radnor)
Griffiths, Rt. Hn. James (Llanelly) Morgan, Elystan (Cardiganshire) Weitzman, David
Griffiths, Will (Exchange) Morris, Alfred (Wythenshawe) Wellbeloved, James
Hale, Leslie (Oldham, W.) Morris, Charles R. (Openshaw) Wells, William (Walsall, N.)
Hamiton James (Bothwell) Moyle, Roland Whitaker, Ben
Hart, Mrs. Judith Murray, Albert White, Mrs. Eirene
Haseldine, Norman Neal, Harold Whitlock, William
Hazell, Bert Norwood, Christopher Wigg, Rt. Hn. George
Healey, Rt. Hn. Denis Ogden, Eric Wilkins, W. A.
Henig, Stanley O'Malley, Brian Williams, Alan (Swansea, W.)
Herbison, Rt. Hn. Margaret Oram, Albert E. Williams, Alan Lee (Hornchurch)
Hilton, W. S. Orbach, Maurice Williams, Clifford (Abertillery)
Hooley, Frank Orme, Stanley Willis, George (Edinburgh, E.)
Horner, John Oswald, Thomas Wilson, William (Coventry, S.)
Houghton, Rt. Hn. Douglas Owen, Dr. David (Plymouth, S'tn) Winnick, David
Howarth, Harry (Wellingborough) Owen, Will (Morpeth) Winterbottom, R. E.
Howarth, Robert (Bolton, E.) Paget, R. T. Woodburn, Rt. Hn. A.
Howell, Denis (Small Heath) Palmer, Arthur Woof, Robert
Howie, W. Park, Trevor Yates, Victor
Hoy, James Parker, John (Dagenham) Zilliacus, K.
Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.) Parkin, Ben (Paddington, N.)
Hughes, Roy (Newport) Pavitt, Laurence TELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Hunter, Adam Peart, Rt. Hn. Fred Mr. Harper and Mr. Walter Harrison.
Hynd, John Pentland, Norman
Irvine, A. J. (Edge Hill) Perry, Ernest G. (Battersea, S.)
Alison, Michael (Barkston Ash) Atkins, Humphrey (M't'n & M'd'n) Barber, Rt. Hn. Anthony
Allason, James (Hemel Hempstead) Awdry, Daniel Batsford, Brian
Astor, John Baker, W. H. K. Beamish, Col. Sir Tufton
Bell, Ronald Griffiths, Eldon (Bury St. Edmunds) Nicholls, Sir Harmar
Bennett, Dr. Reginald (Gos. & Fhm) Gurden, Harold Noble, Rt. Hn. Michael
Berry, Hn. Anthony Hall, John (Wycombe) Nott, John
Bessell, Peter Hall-Davis, A. G. F. Onslow, Cranley
Biffen, John Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury) Orr, Capt. L. P. S.
Biggs-Davison, John Harris, Frederic (Croydon, N. W.) Orr-Ewing, Sir Ian
Birch, Rt. Hn. Nigel Harris, Reader (Heston) Osborn, John (Hallam)
Black, Sir Cyril Harrison, Col. Sir Harwood (Eye) Osborne, Sir Cyril (Louth)
Blaker, Peter Harvey, Sir Arthur Vere Page, Graham (Crosby)
Body, Richard Hastings, Stephen Page, John (Harrow, W.)
Bossom, Sir Clive Hawkins, Paul Pardoe, John
Boyle, Rt. Hn. Sir Edward Heald, Rt. Hn. Sir Lionel Pearson, Sir Frank (Clitheroe)
Braine, Bernard Heath, Rt. Hn. Edward Percival, Ian
Brinton, Sir Tatton Heseltine, Michael Peyton, John
Bromley-Davenport, Lt.-Col. Sir Walter Higgins, Terence L. Pink, R. Bonner
Brown, Sir Edward (Bath) Hill, J. E. B. Powell, Rt. Hn. Enoch
Bruce-Gardyne, J. Hobson, Rt. Hn. Sir John Price, David (Eastleigh)
Bryan, Paul Hogg, Rt. Hn. Quintin Prior, J. M. L.
Buchanan -Smith, Alick (Angus, N&M) Holland, Philip Pym, Francis
Buck, Antony (Colchester) Hooson, Emlyn Quennell, Miss J. M.
Builus, Sir Eric Hordern, Peter Ramsden, Rt. Hn. James
Burden, F. A. Hornby, Richard Rawlinson, Rt. Hn. Sir Peter
Campbell, Gordon Howell, David (Guildford) Rees-Davies, W. R.
Carr, Rt. Hn. Robert Hunt, John Renton, Rt. Hn. Sir David
Cary, Sir Robert Hutchison, Michael Clark Ridley, Hn. Nicholas
Channon, H. P. G. Iremonger, T. L. Ridsdale, Julian
Chichester-Clark, R. Irvine, Bryant Godman (Rye) Rodgers, Sir John (Sevenoaks)
Clark, Henry Jenkin, Patrick (Woodford) Rossi, Hugh (Hornsey)
Clegg, Walter Johnson Smith, G. (E. Grinstead) Royle, Anthony
Cooke, Robert Jones, Arthur (Northants, S.) Russell, Sir Ronald
Cooper-Key, Sir Neill Jopling, Michael St. John-Stevas, Norman
Cordle, John Joseph, Rt. Hn. Sir Keith Scott. Nicholas
Costain, A. P. Kerby, Capt. Henry Sharples, Richard
Craddock, Sir Beresford (Spelthorne) Kimball, Marcus Shaw, Michael (Sc'b'gh & Whitby)
Crawley, Aidan King, Evelyn (Dorset, S.) Sinclair, Sir George
Crouch, David Lambton, Viscount Smith, John
Crowder, F. P. Lancaster, Col. C. G. Stainton, Keith
Cunningham, Sir Knox Langford-Holt, Sir John Steel, David (Roxburgh)
Currie, G. B. H. Legge-Bourke, Sir Harry Summers, Sir Spencer
Dalkeith, Earl of Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland) Taylor, Sir Charles (Eastbourne)
Dance, James Lloyd, Ian (P'tsm'th, Langstone) Taylor, Edward M.(G'gow, Cathcart)
d'Avigdor-Goldsmid, Sir Henry Lloyd, Rt. Hn. Selwyn (Wirral) Taylor, Frank (Moss Side)
Dean, Paul (Somerset, N.) Longden, Gilbert Teeling, Sir William
Deedes, Rt. Hn. W. F. (Ashford) Loveys, W. H. Temple, John M.
Digby, Simon Wingfield Lubbock, Eric Thatcher, Mrs. Margaret
Doughty, Charles McAdden, Sir Stephen Tilney, John
Drayson, G. B. Mackenzie, Alasdair (Ross&Crom'ty) Turton, Rt. Hn. R. H.
du Cann, Rt. Hn. Edward Maclean, Sir Fitzroy van Straubenzee, W. R.
Eden, Sir John Macmillan, Maurice (Farnham) Vaughan-Morgan, Rt. Hn. Sir John
Elliot, Capt. Walter (Carshalton) Maddan, Martin Vickers, Dame Joan
Elliott, R. W (N 'c'te-upon-Tyne. N.) Marples, Rt. Hn. Ernest Walker, Peter (Worcester)
Farr, John Marten, Neil Walker-Smith, Rt. Hn. Sir Derek
Fisher, Nigel Maude, Angus Wall, Patrick
Fletcher-Cooke, Charles Maudling, Rt. Hn. Reginald Walters, Dennis
Fortescue, Tim Mawby, Ray Ward, Dame Irene
Fraser, Rt. Hn. Hugh (St'fford & Stone) Maxwell-Hyslop, R. J. Weatherill, Bernard
Galbraith, Hn. T. G. Mills, Peter (Torrington) Wells, John (Maidstone)
Giles, Rear-Adm. Morgan Mills, Stratton (Belfast, N.) Whitelaw, Rt. Hn. William
Gilmour, Ian (Norfolk, C.) Miscampbell, Norman Wills, Sir Gerald (Bridgwater)
Gilmour, Sir John (Fife, E.) Mitchell, David (Basingstoke) Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)
Glover, Sir Dougles Monro, Hector Winstanley, Dr. M. P.
Glyn, Sir Richard More, Jasper Wolrige-Gordon, Patrick
Godber, Rt. Hn. J. B. Morgan, Geraint (Denbigh) Wood, Rt. Hn. Richard
Goodhart, Philip Morrison, Charles (Devizes) Woodnutt, Mark
Gower, Raymond Mott-Radclyffe, Sir Charles Worsley, Marcus
Grant, Anthony Munro-Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Wylie, N. R.
Grant-Ferris, R. Murton, Oscar Younger, Hn. George
Gresham Cooke, R. Nabarro, Sir Gerald
Grieve, Percy Neave, Airey TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Mr. Eyre and Mr. Kitson.
Mr. Peyton

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I should like to raise a point concerning the incapacity of the House of Commons to deal with marginal notes. It is one thing to be confronted with a Bill which does violence to common sense, but it is quite unnecessary to add to this by doing violence to the English language and introducing horrible words like "penalisation". There are perfectly good alternative words such as "penalty for" or "punishment for". I do not mind which words are used, but for the Government to launch this horrible word upon us is adding insult to injury.

May we have your guidance as to what powers those of us who still value the language have to amend marginal notes which contain such atrocious words as this?

Mr. Speaker

The hon. Gentleman answered his point of order in the first words which he used, when he spoke about "the incapacity of the House" to amend marginal notes. Whatever the hon. Gentleman thinks about the word "penalisation" in the marginal note—and I express no comment on that—he cannot amend it. It is not part of the Bill.