HC Deb 08 March 1967 vol 742 cc1555-69

Part II of this Act shall come into operation on 1st September, 1967.—[Mr. G. Campbell.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. G. Campbell

I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time.

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Eric Fletcher)

It has been suggested that it would be agreeable to the Committee to discuss with this new Clause Amendment No. 59, in Clause 23, page 18, line 16, leave out 'April' and insert 'January';

Amendment No. 77, in Clause 24, page 20, line 28, leave out 'April' and insert 'January';

Amendment No. 81, in line 43, leave out 'April' and insert 'January';

Amendment No. 84, in page 21, line 14, leave out 'April' and insert 'January';

Amendment No. 87, in line 22, leave out 'April' and insert 'January';

Amendment No. 88, in line 25, leave out 'April' and insert 'January';

Amendment No. 92, in Clause 25, page 22, line 6, leave out 'April' and insert 'January';

Amendment No. 94, in line 9, leave out 'April' and insert 'January';

Amendment No. 95, in line 10, leave out 'April' and insert 'January'.

Mr. Campbell

We on this side see no reason why this Bill should not be enacted by the end of July. It could be enacted sooner. We made good progress in Com- mittee and now, in the first half of March, we are proceeding with the remaining stages of the Bill in this House. Under the Bill as now drafted, the option mortgage scheme will not come into effect until 1st April, 1968—over a year from now—but when Parliament has produced the legislation it seems a pity if it cannot be used until then.

The new Clause and the related Amendments would advance this stage by three months without producing any administrative difficulties, because if Part II were brought into operation on 1st September, 1967, the operative date for Clause 23 would be 1st January, 1968, instead of 1st April, 1968. As regards Clause 24, under which cases are considered where applications for loans are made before the starting date for Clause 23, there would be no difficulty, either. Provision could easily be made by the Minister earlier for the directions which are necessary, because where option notices are issued before the date when Clause 23 comes into effect, it is necessary that they be in such form as the Minister has directed. There would be plenty of time after the Bill has been enacted for the Minister to produce the necessary directions so that option notices could be made at any time after enactment and before 1st January, 1968.

In Standing Committee, the Joint Parliamentary Secretary—as reported in col. 434 of the OFFICIAL REPORT—indicated that the main objection to advancing the date was the economic situation, but with the timetable I have just described, bringing the date forward three months could cause no administrative problems, and it is hard to believe that the economic situation is such as to prevent that simple change of three months. There would be a full five months between this Bill becoming law and the entry into force of Clause 23 and the option mortgage scheme.

Nothing was said by the Government when the mortgage option scheme was first produced that it was to be postponed in this way. I know that the first scheme appeared just before the General Election, but I cannot recall a postponement to 1st April, 1968, being then stated. As we know, the first scheme, which was produced a year ago, had to be dropped after the election, and a new one thought of and brought forward. Throughout this period the economic situation has been critical, and it is a bit late in the day for the Government to say now that it is the economic situation which is causing this unnecessary postponement of the option mortgage scheme.

There is another effect of this new Clause, and it is that it would enable the guarantee scheme under Clause 29 to be brought into effect from 1st January, 1968. At present that scheme has no date. Again this has been held out to the general public as a definite scheme, but postponed to an indefinite date.

5.0 p.m.

Having, in Parliament, produced Clause 29, as we hope it will appear when the Bill has finished its stages through this House and another place, to provide for a scheme whereby the Government and insurance companies would help with up to 100 per cent. of the deposit in certain cases, thereby assisting many people, particularly young married people who would otherwise have difficulty in raising the money for a deposit, why do we have to wait, with no definite date and no indication of when this will be brought into effect?

With, we hope, Part II of this Bill and Clause 29 on the Statute Book by July at the latest, surely the Government will take the opportunity of beginning the guarantee scheme from 1st January, 1968?

Mr. Rossi

After the pleasantries that we had over the last new Clause it is a pity now that a note of discord should enter our discussions. The option mortgage scheme is about as petty a piece of electioneering as we have ever had the misfortune to see. In two successive General Elections the public have been deliberately misled and defrauded by the Labour Party. During the 1964 General Election the young married couples of this country looking for homes were told that they would be able to obtain mortgages at 3 per cent. What happened to that promise after that Election?

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. As far as I can see, this new Clause only deals with the coming into operation of Part II of the Bill.

Mr. Rossi

That is so, and I am directing my observations to that but I was giving a little historical background, in order that we may see the whole argument in its proper perspective. I feel that this is necessary.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

Order. I would remind the hon. Gentleman that this is the Report stage. We are not in Committee.

Mr. Rossi

I appreciate that, Mr. Deputy Speaker, but we are discussing a mortgage option scheme which gives help on interest rates to certain sections of the population, and one has to evaluate the measure of protection that the public is being given when this protection comes into operation, against the general position as it exists in the country now, without this Measure. This is what I am trying to show. I was trying to say that the current interest rate for mortgages is now 7¼ per cent. This is without this proposed Measure. This rate has to be considered against the promises and undertakings given in the past.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

All that we can discuss on this new Clause is the date on which Part II shall come into operation.

Mr. Rossi

In the White Paper, "Help Towards Home Ownership", which I hope it is in order to discuss—and this was relevant at the last General Election —certain new promises were made, on the basis of which the election was fought. Those promises are now being postponed by this Measure for a considerable time.

It is our desire on this side of the House that this mortgage option scheme be introduced at the earliest possible moment, to implement the promises made to the public. The Government are finding excuse after excuse for not implementing these promises as soon as possible. They are able to find vast sums of money for local authorities to purchase existing properties. I am not talking of new development, not even housing development schemes. This is money that produces not a single additional unit of accommodation. Public money can be squandered in this fashion, but the economic stringencies are such that we cannot bring forward this scheme for the benefit of young married couples at an early date. It is this which I am seeking to criticise, and it is this that the new Clause is seeking to rectify. We regret that we have to put down a date as remote as September, 1967. We would have preferred to put forward a date of 5th April, 1967, but we are precluded from doing this because we moved an Amendment to that effect in Committee. This is the next best date that we can bring forward in order to express our displeasure at the machinations of the Government and the Labour Party over this Measure.

Mr. Oscar Murton (Poole)

There is one point to which I should like to draw attention in respect of this new Clause. It relates to the bringing into operation of the guarantees for mortgages up to 100 per cent. of valuation. I raised this question when we were in Standing Committee and it was one of the two schemes brought forward under this new Clause. I found, when I proposed an Amendment upstairs, that the Joint Parliamentary Secretary was entirely unconvincing in his arguments as to why this should not be done now but left until an indefinite date in the future.

The object of bringing this in again is to try to persuade the Government to redeem what we on this side of the House consider to have been a great breach of faith toward the electorate. I might perhaps remind you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, without going out of order, that this was a promise made at a certain time in the White Paper, "Help Towards Home Ownership". It was said then that mortgages up to 100 per cent. of valuation would be available to young couples.

The failure by the Government to put this into effect, and to refuse to give any date as to when it will be put into effect, is bringing heartbreak to these young couples, who thought that at last here was something concrete on which they could base their future plans. I feel very strongly that the Government should now redeem the position by accepting this new Clause, by putting in a specific date as to when this scheme will be introduced, instead of leaving it indefinite, nebulous, and just one more promise which up to now has been cynically disregarded.

The Joint Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government (Mr. James MacColl)

I am not sure whether I have the same Notice Paper as the hon. Member for Poole (Mr. Murton). I may have misread it, but I cannot find anything on my Notice Paper, in the new Clause or in the Amendments, dealing with Clause 29. We are talking about Clauses 23 and 24, and the bringing of Part II into operation does not affect in any way the date which is concerned in Clause 29. The date of operation is fixed by Statutory Instrument.

I was very grateful to have the near undertaking from the hon. Member for Moray and Nairn (Mr. G. Campbell) that we would get the Bill by the end of July. I have always been doubtful about trying to fix a date because there are places where our writ does not run as firmly as it does here. I have never been sure whether we would get the Bill, but we hope that we shall get it.

I do not wish to make a lot of the point, because I do not like taking drafting points, but the new Clause would put off the date of coming into operation of Part II, not bring it forward. Therefore, if it has any effect at all, we would not be able to get on with the preliminary work—such as prescribing lending agencies, making Statutory Instruments about housing associations, making schemes and giving directions—which we need to do before the option mortgage scheme comes into operation. We can do this as soon as the Bill receives the Royal Assent.

Mr. Frederic Harris (Croydon, North-West)

Would the hon. Gentleman explain what he means by "put off the date"?

Mr. MacColl

Because of the hon. Gentleman's many commitments, he has not been with us long. I do not know whether he has heard the whole debate.

Mr. Harris

Yes.

Mr. MacColl

The hon. Gentleman must have found it as difficult to follow as I did.

The proposal in the new Clause is to put off the appointed day until September. The appointed day is the day of the Royal Assent. If the Bill receives the Royal Assent in July, as the hon. Member for Moray and Nairn assured us that it would, then the new Clause would have the effect of putting off the appointed day.

Mr. G. Campbell

Since the hon. Gentleman says that he found the debate difficult to understand, may I remind him of what I said. I pointed out that among the associated Amendments which are being discussed with the new Clause there was an important Amendment which advanced the date 1st April, 1968 under Clause 23 to 1st January, 1968. I also pointed out that all the work which the hon. Gentleman has been describing could be done and the directions issued on the date that Part II came into force. The hon. Gentleman is simply cribbing about a minor point. Our proposal would in no way cause administrative difficulty.

Mr. MacColl

I am sorry if the hon. Gentleman thinks that I am cribbing about a minor point. I do not wish to do so. If the new Clause were accepted, it would postpone the appointed day in Part II, and therefore if it has any meaning—I used that phrase before; I qualified what I said—its effect would be to put off, and not bring forward, the preliminary administrative arrangements which we have to do before we can bring the option mortgage scheme into force. Therefore, from that point of view, there is no virtue in it at all.

I wish to deal with the substantial point—the date when the option mortgage scheme comes into operation. The hon. Member took on the air of someone who had delved deep and had found words of mine which would embarrass my right hon. Friend who perhaps was hearing them for the first time. I said that the real problem was not administration but the economic situation. We said that on Second Reading. We said it in Committee. We say it now. If necessary, we shall say it on Third Reading. We do not pretend that the primary difficulty is administration. There are administrative advantages in postponing, but the main point is the economic situation.

Therefore, our duty, if we are to govern the country responsibly, is not to bring in a scheme before the resources are available to finance it. We have said, therefore, that the thing which we must do immediately—in fact, more than im- mediately because it is retrospective—is to bring into operation the housing subsidies in the public sector. These are the biggest housing subsidies we have ever had in the public sector. This is a considerable step forward against the background of economic difficulties.

5.15 p.m.

Secondly, we wish to bring the option mortgage scheme into operation on 1st April, 1968. We have put a date on that to make it clear that that is our intention and that there is no deception about it. The hon. Member for Hornsey (Mr. Rossi) said that this was inconsistent with what was said in the White Paper. The White Paper used precisely the same phrase as I used—" as soon as the country's economic situation allows". It did not fix a date for the introduction of the scheme. It gave no date at all. It made it clear that it would come into operation when the economic situation allowed.

Mr. Rossi

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that during the General Election members of the public were given the impression that during the 13 years that right hon. and hon. Members opposite were in opposition they were hatching their plans and were ready to go ahead with their new measures the moment that they were returned to power? This is the cynical attitude of which I complain—the impression created in the minds of the public that these things were ready to be started immediately the hon. Gentleman and his colleagues returned to power.

Mr. MacColl

What we did in the General Election was to make it perfectly clear that the programme which we were putting before the country was not a programme for the first Session or the second Session, but a programme to get a mandate for a whole Parliament. Right hon. and hon. Members opposite made a great crow when the previous subsidies Bill came into operation, saying, "You will never do anything about the owner-occupier". Unexpectedly, and to their acute embarrassment, we have done it.

Another criticism of us is that we had to revise the scheme and that it had to be altered in consultation with the building societies. My goodness me, the Opposition messed around for 13 years and produced no scheme at all. They completely failed to do anything about the matter. It is not a bad thing that within a year of the election we have succeeded in getting a scheme which has the support of the lending agencies and which we are ready to put into operation on 1st April next year. I do not think that is something to be ashamed of. We can feel that we have done extremely well. Yet the Opposition attack us for being straightforward and saying, "We have a tremendous lot to do. The country is in a difficult economic situation. We are doing all the preliminary work between now and 1st April, 1968, when we will be ready to start. We do not propose trying to buy popularity by saying that we shall introduce the scheme earlier".

Mr. William Baxter (West Stirlingshire)

My hon. Friend will recollect that we clearly said to the electors that we must put the economy right and clean up the mess left by the Tories, and that it was absolutely necessary for the country to pay its way. Most of the electors recognised that simple fact. All our social services depend on the country being solvent. This is the main aim and object of the Government.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary will not pursue that point. We are discussing the date of the coming into operation of Part II of this Bill.

Mr. MacColl

Out of deference to your ruling, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I will pursue it only to the extent of making the comment that I think that my hon. Friend made a very good point.

As I have said, the Amendments have no effect on the appointed day except, possibly, to postpone it. As for the coming into operation of the scheme, they make a difference of only three months and, therefore, the amount involved may not be very large. However, the benefit given is not very great, either.

If the scheme applied only to new borrowers—in other words, if Clause 23 was the only Clause and there was no Clause 24—there would be considerable force behind the argument for putting it forward, because people would not borrow since they would be afraid of losing their chance of an option. Clause 24 provides that even old borrowers can exercise the option and, in view of that, there will be no point in holding back. Old borrowers will get the same subsidy facilities, but they will lose three months' rate of interest.

This is an alteration which is proposed out of an attitude of petulance. The Opposition are annoyed that we have brought in this scheme and it is rankling with them. They are exhibiting irresponsible demagoguery, saying, "Why not introduce it? There is no problem. There is lots of 'lolly' to chuck around." However, we are aware of the economic situation and conscious of the need to improve it, and we have the confidence of the electorate in supporting the Bill.

Mr. Frederic Harris

One feels very kindly towards the Parliamentary Secretary, but I wonder if he realises the hypocrisy with which he has just put over the fact that he cannot let the date come forward because of the economic situation. With the Land Commission Act becoming operative on 6th April, there appears to be something out of balance. We have had the nationalisation of steel involving £500 million, and when he tries to pretend that the priorities are in the right place, he is completely misleading the House and the country. However, we know the answer to it, and we can vote on this point.

Mr. Allason

I would remind the Parliamentary Secretary that, in introducing Part II, the Government have taken the advice tendered to them by the Opposition during the debate on the earlier Bill in the last Parliament. We voted against that Bill on the grounds that it did not contain Part II, and we are at least grateful that, at long last, Part II has been included. However, we should like to hurry it up a little because, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Hornsey (Mr. Rossi) reminded us, there is an urgency to introduce the scheme.

The Parliamentary Secretary said that anyone can change over to the scheme and, therefore, it does not matter very much when it is introduced because it will be introduced and someone will start getting benefit from it at some time or other.

Mr. MacColl

I said that it was being introduced on 1st April. The hon. Gentleman is getting confused again between Clause 29 and Clause 23. I wish that the hon. Member for Southend, West (Mr. Channon) could explain the difference to him, because I am sure that he knows.

Mr. Allason

Granted that the Parliamentary Secretary said that it would be delayed three months. I said that it would be delayed for some time. However, I am aware that he has at long last set a date for the mortgage option scheme, though I still say that the date is much too late.

The first reason which he gave to us was the technical one. He said that this was a bad Clause because it would prevent the preliminary work being done. That is a very strange statement from a Government who appointed the Parliamentary Commissioner months before they had any Parliamentary approval, and who appointed the Chairman of the Steel Corporation and other members long before there was Parliamentary authority. The same goes for the Chairman of the Land Commission, for which his own Ministry is now responsible. I appreciate that it was not at the time, but the hon. Member must have been aware of that appointment. He must wake up. There is no point in the Government wringing their hands and saying, "We cannot take action because we have not got Parliamentary approval". They never worry about that.

The true argument is that of the financial position. As we are constantly reminded by Socialists, this is a matter of priorities. However, it is odd that when there is something useful to be done to

help citizens, it has to be left to such a late date. After all, the priority at the moment appears to be save costs overseas. Here, the money which will be spent will not leave the country. The Parliamentary Secretary should go back and have another word with the Chancellor of the Exchequer about it. His right hon. Friend will be introducing his Budget shortly and will take an enormous slice of money from our citizens. This little sum will not be noticeable in the figures about which the Chancellor is thinking at the moment.

The funny thing is that we hear talk about insolvency and the terrible shortage of money. We did not hear that at the time of the last election.

Mr. Raymond Gower (Barry)

May I remind my hon. Friend that, having been in power and having taken full account of the economy of the country, one of the main planks of the Labour Party's manifesto was that in the next four or five years the standard of living of people in this country would be improved by 25 per cent.?

Mr. Allason

But, of course, the National Plan has taken a bit of a dip. However, we did not know about that at the time of the last election. It came as a terrible surprise afterwards to learn that the National Plan had to be abandoned.

We press for this. It is quite intolerable that there should be such an appalling delay in introducing the mortgage option scheme. Therefore, I invite my right hon. and hon. Friends to vote for the Clause.

Question put, That the Clause be read a Second time:—

The House divided: Ayes 134, Noes 189.

Division No. 285.] AYES [5.27 p.m.
Allason, James (Hemel Hempstead) Bullus, Sir Eric Gibson-Watt, David
Astor, John Burden, F. A. Gilmour, Ian (Norfolk, C.)
Atkins, Humphrey (M't'n & M'd'n) Campbell, Gordon Gilmour, Sir John (Fife, E.)
Batsford, Brian Carlisle, Mark Goodhew, Victor
Bell, Ronald Carr, Rt. Hn. Robert Grant-Ferris, R.
Bennett, Sir Frederic (Torquay) Channon, H. P. G. Gurden, Harold
Bennett, Dr. Reginald (Gos. & Fhm) Cooke, Robert Hail-Davis, A. G. F.
Biffen, John Crouch, David Hamilton, Marquess of (Fermanagh)
Birch, Rt. Hn. Nigel Cunningham, Sir Knox Harris, Frederic (Croydon, N.W.)
Bossom, Sir Clive Dalkeith, Earl of Harrison, Col. Sir Harwood (Eye)
Boyd-Carpenter, Rt. Hn. John Dance, James Harvie Anderson, Miss
Boyle, Rt. Hn. Sir Edward Dean, Paul (Somerset, N.) Hastings, Stephen
Brewis, John Dodds-Parker, Douglas Heath, Rt. Hn. Edward
Brinton, Sir Tatton Eden, Sir John Hill, J. E. B.
Bromley-Davenport.Lt.-Col.SirWalter Elliot Capt. Wailer (Carshalton) Hirst, Geoffrey
Brown, Sir Edward (Bath) Errington, Sir Eric Hobson, Rt. Hn. Sir John
Bruce-Gardyne, J. Farr, John Hogg, Rt. Hn. Quintin
Buck, Antony (Colchester) Fortescue, Tim Holland, Philip
Hordern, Peter Mitchell, David (Basingstoke) Smith, John
Hornby, Richard Monro, Hector Stoddart-Scott, Col. Sir M. (Ripon)
Howell, David (Guildford) More, Jasper Taylor, Sir Charles (Eastbourne)
Hutchison, Michael Clark Munro-Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Taylor,Edward M.(G'gow,Cathcart)
Iremonger, T. L. Murton, Oscar Taylor, Frank (Moss Side)
Irvine, Bryant Godman (Rye) Nicholls, Sir Harmar Teeling, Sir William
Jenkin, Patrick (Woodford) Nott, John Temple, John M.
Jones, Arthur (Northants, S.) Osborn, John (Hallam) Turton, Rt. Hn. R. H.
Jopling, Michael Page, Graham (Crosby) van Straubenzee, W. R.
Joseph, Rt. Hn. Sir Keith Page, John (Harrow, W.) Vaughan-Morgan, Rt. Hn. Sir John
Kershaw, Anthony Percival, Ian Walker, Peter (Worcester)
King, Evelyn (Dorset, S.) Peyton, John Walker-Smith, Rt. Hn. Sir Derek
Kirk, Peter Pink, R. Bonner Wall, Patrick
Kitson, Timothy Powell, Rt. Hn. J. Enoch Walters, Dennis
Knight, Mrs. Jill Prior, J. M. L. Ward, Dame Irene
Lancaster, Col. C. G. Pym, Francis Weatherill, Bernard
Langford-Holt, Sir John Ramsden, Rt. Hn. James Webster, David
Legge-Bourke, Sir Harry Ridley, Hn. Nicholas Wells, John (Maidstone)
Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland) Ridsdale, Julian Whitelaw, Rt. Hn. William
Lloyd, Ian (P'tsm'th, Langstone) Rodgers, Sir John (Sevenoaks) Wills, Sir Gerald (Bridgwater)
McAdden, Sir Stephen Roots, William Wolrige-Gordon, Patrick
Maclean, Sir Fitzroy Rossi, Hugh (Hornsey) Wood, Rt. Hon. Richard
McMaster, Stanley Royle, Anthony Worsley, Marcus
Marten, Neil Russell, Sir Ronald Wylie, N. R.
Maude, Angus Scott, Nicholas
Maxwell-Hyslop, R. J. Sharples, Richard TELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Maydon, Lt.-Cmdr. S. L. C. Shaw, Michael (Sc'b'gh & Whitby) Mr. Grant and Mr. Eyre.
Mills, Stratton (Belfast, N.) Sinclair, Sir George
NOES
Abse, Leo Eadie, Alex Mackintosh, John P.
Albu, Austen Edwards, Rt. Hn. Ness (Caerphilly) McNamara, J. Kevin
Alldritt, Walter Edwards, Robert (Bilston) Mallalieu, E. L. (Brigg)
Allen, Scholefield English, Michael Manuel, Archie
Anderson, Donald Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W.) Mapp, Charles
Archer, Peter Evans, loan L. (Birm'h'm, Yardley) Marquand, David
Armstrong, Ernest Finch, Harold Mellish, Robert
Ashley, Jack Fitch, Alan (Wigan) Mendelson, J. J.
Atkins, Ronald (Preston, N.) Fletcher, Raymond (Ilkeston) Milne, Edward (Blyth)
Atkinson, Norman (Tottenham) Foley, Maurice Morgan, Elystan (Cardiganshire)
Bacon, Rt. Hn. Alice Foot, Michael (Ebbw Vale) Morris, Charles R. (Openshaw)
Bagier, Gordon A. T. Ford, Ben Moyle, Roland
Barnett, Joel Forrester, John Murray, Albert
Baxter, William Fraser, John (Norwood) Neal, Harold
Bessell, Peter Garrett, W. E. Newens, Stan
Binns, John Ginsburg, David Noel-Baker, Francis (Swindon)
Bishop, E. S. Gray, Dr. Hugh (Yarmouth) Oakes, Gordon
Blackburn, F. Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Anthony Ogden, Eric
Blenkinsop, Arthur Grey, Charles (Durham) O'Malley, Brian
Boardman, H. Hamling, William Orbach, Maurice
Booth, Albert Harrison, Walter (Wakefield) Orme, Stanley
Boyden, James Haseldine, Norman Oswald, Thomas
Bradley, Tom Henig, Stanley Owen, Dr. David (Plymouth, S'tn)
Brooks, Edwin Hobden, Dennis (Brighton, K'town) Padley, Walter
Broughton, Dr. A. D. D. Hooley, Frank Page, Derek (King's Lynn)
Brown,Bob(N'c'tle-upon-Tyne,W.) Houghton, Rt. Hn. Douglas Pannell, Rt. Hn. Charles
Brown, R. W.(Shoreditch & F'bury) Hughes, Emrys (Ayrshire, S.) Park, Trevor
Buchan, Norman Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.) Parkyn, Brian (Bedford)
Buchanan, Richard (G'gow, Sp'burn) Hunter, Adam Pearson, Arthur (Pontypridd)
Butler, Mrs. Joyce (Wood Green) Irvine, A. J. (Edge Hill) Pentland, Norman
Cant, R. B. Jackson, Colin (B'h'se & Spenb'gh) Perry, Ernest G. (Battersea, S.)
Carter-Jones, Lewis Jackson, Peter M. (High Peak) Price, Thomas (Westhoughton)
Chapman, Donald Jeger, George (Goole) Probert, Arthur
Coe, Denis Jenkins, Hugh (Putney) Randall, Harry
Concannon, J. D. Jenkins, Rt. Hn. Roy (Stechford) Rankin, John
Craddock, George (Bradford, S.) Johnson, James (K'ston-on-Hull, W.) Redhead, Edward
Crawshaw, Richard Jones, Dan (Burnley) Rees, Merlyn
Crossman, Rt. Hn. Richard Jones, J. Idwal (Wrexham) Rhodes, Geoffrey
Dalyell, Tam Judd, Frank Roberts, Albert (Normanton)
Davidson,James(Aberdeenshire,W.) Kelley, Richard Robinson, W. O. J. (Walth'stow, E.)
Davies, Dr. Ernest (Stretford) Lawson, George Rogers, George (Kensington, N.)
Davies, Ednyfed Hudson (Conway) Leadbitter, Ted Rose, Paul
Davies, Robert (Cambridge) Lester, Miss Joan Rossi, Hugh (Hornsey)
Davies, S. O. (Merthyr) Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) Rowland, Christopher (Meriden)
Dempsey, James Lomas, Kenneth Shaw, Arnold (Ilford, S.)
Dewar, Donald Loughlin, Charles Shinwell, Rt. Hn. E.
Dickens, James Luard, Evan Silkin, Rt. Hn. John (Deptford)
Dobson, Ray Lyon, Alexander W. (York) Silkin, Hn. S. C. (Dulwich)
Doig, Peter Lyons, Edward (Bradford, E.) Silverman, Julius (Aston)
Driberg, Tom McCann, John Silverman, Sydney (Nelson)
Dunn, James A. MacColl, James Spriggs, Leslie
Dunnett, Jack Macdonald, A. H. Steel, David (Roxburgh)
Dunwoody, Mrs. Gwyneth (Exeter) McGuire, Michael Steele,Thomas(Dunbartonshire,W.)
Dunwoody, Dr. John (F'th & C'b'e) McKay, Mrs. Margaret Strauss, Rt. Hn. G. R.
Swain, Thomas Wallace, George Williams, Mrs. Shirley (Hitchin)
Symonds, J. B. Watkins, David (Consett) Williams, W. T. (Warrington)
Taverne, Dick Watkins, Tudor (Brecon & Radnor) Winstanley, Dr. M. P.
Tinn, James Wellbeloved, James Winterbottom, R. E.
Urwin, T. W. Whitaker, Ben Woodburn, Rt. Hn. A.
Varley, Eric G. Whitlock, William Woof, Robert
Wainwright, Edwin (Dearne Valley) Wilkins, W. A. Yates, Victor
Wainwright, Richard (Colne Valley) Willey, Rt. Hn. Frederick
Walden, Brian (All Saints) Williams, Alan (Swansea, W.) TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Walker, Harold (Doncaster) Williams, Clifford (Abertillery) Mr. Harper and Mr. Gourlay.