§ Question proposed, That the Clause stand part of the Bill.
§ 10.29 p.m.
§ Mr. Graham Page (Crosby)Erskine May, on page 153, confirms that we may criticise consolidation Measures on the grounds that the words of the Bill do 637 not express clearly the law as it stands. I object to Clause 1 because subsection (3) does not express the law as it stands at all. If that subsection were omitted, we might have a reasonable statement of the law, but it should not be part of the Clause. I cannot go into the merits of a consolidation Measure, so I merely record my protest on subsection (3).
§ 10.30 p.m.
§ The Solicitor-General (Sir Arthur Irvine)Confronted by a significant and distinguished product of the efforts of draftsmen and lawyers in dealing with the consolidation of the Rent Acts, the hon. Member for Crosby (Mr. Graham Page) resorts to this type of narking comment. I use the term advisedly because there has not come from him thus far—it may come later; I hope it will—a word of recognition for the distinguished labours that have gone into this extremely valuable task.
The hon. Gentleman's argument is that because subsection (1) is in its present form—namely, providing that a tenancy is within the Measure unless certain factors exist—this in itself raises the very presumption which is repeated in subsection (3).
§ Mr. Graham Pageindicated assent.
§ The Solicitor-GeneralI am glad to have an indication from him that that is his criticism.
The answer is that subsection (3) is derived from Section 7 of the 1938 Act and that it would, in our view, be unwise to omit a specifically statutory presumption solely in reliance on the form of words used in subsection (1). Whether that form of words is strong enough to raise a similar presumption is doubtful because it is arguable that the subsection merely makes a statement of fact.
Further to that, I ask the Committee to bear in mind that subsection (3) was specifically considered by the Joint Select Committee and was thoroughly dealt with. I suggest, therefore, that hon. Members should not willingly remove a provision which the Joint Select Committee, which was appointed to consider the Bill, examined and approved. Having considered the hon. Gentleman's comments, I do not hesitate to recommend the Clause in its present form.
§ Mr. Graham PageIn case it be thought that I have been discourteous and have not appreciated the tremendous work which has been done in consolidating in this Measure the law relating to rent restriction, I repeat what I said on Second Reading; that this is a mammoth task, undertaken splendidly by the draftsmen.
My complaint is that the Government have not helped the draftsmen by tidying up the law first. In this case perhaps the draftsmen overstepped the existing law and have thrown the onus of proof in some cases on the landlord where it stood on the tenant before. However, it is not open to me to argue the merits of this matter, and I repeat that subsection (3) is not the law.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
§ Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.