§ AMENDMENT OF PROVISIONS AS TO PARKING PLACES
§ Mr. Michael HeseltineI beg to move Amendment No. 570, in page 154, line 35, leave out ' paragraphs ' and insert:
'paragraph—(d) provided that adequate provision for off-street parking facilities in each local authority area has been made then such surplus may be applied to—(i)'.This Amendment deals with the question of how one should use the revenue from the parking meter scheme. In the Bill there are proposals that the present usage of surplus funds from parking meters, which is restricted by legislation to the provision of off-street parking, should be changed to permit a much wider usage as defined in this Bill.Many hon. Members who were in the House at the time the right hon. Member for Kingston-upon-Thames (Mr. Boyd-Carpenter) introduced the necessary 1994 legislation to establish parking meter schemes will remember the quite categorical assurance given by the Government of the day that the further taxation received from motorists, which is what this amounts to, would only be used for the provision of off-street parking.
There were wide-ranging debates and public argument at the time, and it was on the basis of the specific and categorical assurances given that large numbers of motorists were prepared to accept this new taxing system.
The House should understand that what is in the Bill is a major departure of principle from the purpose for which the parking meter scheme was set up. It is very important to remember this, bearing in mind that although at the moment the surplus revenue from parking meter schemes is not very much, and in many of the places where figures are available deficits are being incurred and it is only in the very largest conurbations that substantial surpluses are being thrown up, this situation is going to change for three reasons.
First, the number of oars is growing rapidly. Secondly, as local authorities become increasingly used to the sort of experience they are now obtaining from these schemes, they are very likely to put up the prices they charge for the use of parking space. Thirdly, the meter schemes are expanding into the wider areas within conurbations.
We can look forward, over the next decade or so, to a very large increase in the surpluses. We seek to ensure not quite such a restrictive situation as was first envisaged, but a much more reasonable compromise, in the light of current thinking about off-street parking. We do not want to restrict the use of surpluses from meters to the provision of off-street parking only. We want to restrict it to the provision of off-street parking until there are adequate provisions for such parking in each local authority. That seems a perfectly reasonable compromise.
We are anxious about the sort of usages, and the sort of people who might share these revenues. The legislation provides that local authorities can use this revenue, and that is accepted. It also provides for "any other person" to be the beneficiary of the surpluses and this raises some questions. What is 1995 meant by "any other person"? One cannot help reflecting upon the sort of atmosphere and the sort of organisation which will exist in our cities once the P.T.A.S come into being.
What are the purposes to which the local authorities or the persons who are entitled to benefit will put these surpluses? The purpose, one would anticipate, is in the legislation—for the provision or operation of passenger transport services. Presumably, the owner of a car wishing to park in the city centre will find himself financing the deficits of the local buses. That is a logical step which many people might want to take. I do not want to argue that point.
What I do want to deal with is the second use to which this money may be put, in the hands of a local authority, or "any other person." This is where the permissive powers envisaged have been permitted to run wild. The money is not only for the provision or operation of passenger transport services, but also for the facilities associated with the public passenger transport services. Once again we have to go back to the P.T.A. part of the Bill to see what is envisaged by the word "facilities." If I were satisfied that those were strictly and tightly defined additions to the provision of bus services, I do not suppose that my anxiety would be as great as it is.
When those of us who have sat through the Committee reflect upon those 32 powers in Clause 10, dealing with the facilities, one can begin to understand why we have to ask this fundamental question about the purpose to which this parking meter revenue surplus will be put. I would remind the House of the facilities listed in Clause 10. There are filling stations, selling petrol, oil and spare parts, there is the provision of buffets, and also the operation of bookstalls. All these things have to run at break-even, not on a commercial, profitable basis. All these are defined as facilities ancillary to the provision of passenger transport services.
Now, in addition to being permitted to run at break-even, we find that they can be financed by the poor motorist, from parking meter revenue. This cannot seriously be part of the co-ordinated transport policy put forward by the 1996 former Minister of Transport. It is conceivable, and I would accept the right hon. Gentleman's assurance if he were to give it, that this interpretation of the legislation had not occurred to those drafting it.
11.30 p.m.
This has been a big Bill and has proceeded over a long time. It is understandable if every nuance of the legislation has not been thoroughly explored and tested. It would be reasonable for the right hon. Gentleman to say that as we have had a Guillotine and a very proscribed Committee stage, and 50 Clauses have not been considered, it would not be surprising to the House if this Clause and the interpretation I place upon it had escaped attention. There would be time for the right hon. Gentleman to do something about it in another place and we would accept it in a generous spirit if he were able to make such a gesture.
I cannot seriously believe that with the experience of transport that he has gained—and we know that he has had a very brusque indoctrination in transport since he took over the Ministry—he is willing to tell 13 million motorists that they are now to pay their sixpences and shillings, and increasingly Is. 6d. and 2s., into the growing army of parking meters to finance buffets, petrol stations and bookstalls operated by local councils. That is what this legislation says can be done.
I regard it as a ludicrous interpretation of a transport policy and I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will be able to set our minds at rest. Despite this interpretation of law it is quite wrong that we should be breaching the very definite and categorical assurances that were given to motorists at the time when the parking meter scheme was first introduced. I do not need to read the quotations. Definite assurances were then given and I am not aware of any reason why those should yet be changed. There could come a time when there is sufficient off-street parking, even if because a local authority has decided, as a matter of policy, that it does not want to provide too much off-street parking.
That is already happening in the case of the Greater London Council. At that time, in the eyes of the local legislature, 1997 there would be sufficient off-street parking. But there is a strong obligation on those administering the transport of this country to provide such parking up to the point of sufficiency as embraced and anticipated in the assurances given when the scheme was first set up.
§ Mr. Swingler rose—
Mr. Leslie HnckfieldOn a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. I do not rise to call attention to the fact that I was not called—and I was not—but I was standing at the same time as the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. Deputy SpeakerI was in some doubt whether the hon. Member for Truro (Mr. Geoffrey Wilson) was seeking to raise a point or make a speech. He was only called, as far as the Chair is concerned, to make an intervention.
§ Mr. SwinglerI am sorry; had I known I would have given way to the hon. Gentleman. I did not think that he would wish to continue with this, because during the 45 sittings and 191½ hours spent in Standing Committee F this was one of the subjects which was very extensively discussed. I remember, as other hon. Gentlemen will, that the hon. Member for Truro (Mr. Geoffrey Wilson) raised precisely this issue of undertakings given by a previous Administration about the application of parking meter revenue. I remember replying at some length, on the issue of the proposal put forward in the White Paper dealing with public transport and traffic, on the reasons why we had come to this conclusion. On that occasion we did not have a very highly partisan debate. It has been left to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Tavistock (Mr. Michael Heseltine) to inject into this discussion his own particular brand of partisan spleen about public transport authorities. No doubt some wish to discuss it like this, but I do not.
Under the Bill, local authorities will have a statutory duty to provide parking space on and off the highway, but the powers are permissive. My right hon. Friend is not telling local authorities to 1998 do anything. If they want to spend meter revenue on off-street parking space, this will be decided by local democracy. My right hon. Friend is just extending the flexibility for the motorists' benefit, so that the revenue may also be used on, for example, improvement of the highways. I do not understand the argument that this does not benefit the motorist.
11.30 p.m.
One of our purposes is to extend local authority flexibility in respect of road improvement. The other is that the local authorities can spend the money on improving public transport—[An HON. MEMBER: "Why?"]—because it is necessary to make public transport more efficient and attractive, if we are to benefit the motorist by decongesting the urban areas. I know that some hon. Gentlemen contest this because they want to continue the jungle warfare in this field, with total laisser faire, sweeping away any regulations in favour of chaos and a free-for-all. I do not try to persuade them, because they are opposed to the Bill from A to Z. But there are those who believe in traffic management and the part that public transport can play in reducing congestion. They can understand the recent London Transport poster comparing the street space occupied by one bus with that occupied by 60 cars, and they know that improving public transport to attract people to use it and make it viable is one of the ways to decongest the cities.
We do not say that local authorities should devote their money to these purposes but that they should be able to do so if they wish and may choose between more off-street parking space, if they can find it, and the improvement of public transport and its facilities. These are three ways in which they may invest parking meter revenue, all of which will benefit the motoring community. Therefore, I hope that the House will reject the Amendment.
Mr. Geoffrey WilsonI will not repeat the speech which I made in Committee, but this is a definite breach of a promise given by a previous Government. The Government are entitled to break it, but it was solemnly given to hon. Members, who agreed to the control of on-street parking only on the strength of that promise. There are many other systems, such as the zone system, and so 1999 on, which would not have involved the same cost to the motorist. It was only because they were told that the balance of the money from parking meters would be used for off street parking that parking meters were agreed to.
If the Government like to retract that promise and use the money for other purposes they are entitled to do so, but I do not think it is a matter which we should pass without notice. It may be of some benefit to the motorist to use it for other purposes, but that was not the point.
§ Mr. Leslie HuckfieldI was just inquiring from one or two of my hon. Friends when such a promise was made. If this promise was made it was not made by this Government, but by the Government which introduced parking meters. The hon. Gentleman ought to get his facts straight. Parking meters were first brought in in 1964.
Mr. WilsonI am most grateful. I said that. It was my right hon. Friend the Member for Kingston-upon-Thames (Mr. Boyd-Carpenter) who introduced them and gave the categorical assurance in this House.
§ Mr. Michael HeseltineWhen the hon. Gentleman reads the OFFICIAL REPORT of my hon. Friend's remarks he will see that he made that clear.
§ Mr. HuckfieldIf I may intervene in my own speech, it has been placed on record that he made this promise.
I would be happier if hon. Gentlemen opposite would concern themselves more with where some of the revenue collected from private parking schemes is going. I am thinking particularly of the private company that springs up every time there is a motor show or a boat show or some other national sporting event and charge 5s. Od. or 7s. 6d.—in fact, imposing a prohibitive charge.
The principle embodied in this section of the Bill, to take some of the parking meter revenue and spend it on public transport, is a very sensible suggestion. Unless we can make public transport facilities more attractive and effective it would seem that the only alternative, as has been suggested from time to time by hon. Members opposite, is to subsidise it from the rates or taxes. I would 2000 have thought a more attractive revenue would be from parking meter charges.
If hon. Members opposite do not like this, from time to time various sections of their party have suggested that some kind of congestion taxes should be imposed on the private motorist and spent in this way. They must come to some conclusion on this. This is one of the most sensible solutions we have had on planning urban transport for many a year.
§ Sir Harmar NichollsThe Minister gave a miserable reply to an excellent speech by my hon. Friend the Member for Tavistock (Mr. Michael Heseltine). Why cannot the hon. Gentleman occasionally be given power to accept Opposition Amendments? The right hon. Gentleman does all the giving way when the Government wish to accept our proposals, and he leaves it to the Minister of State to make the miserable and negative replies.
I completely disagree with the hon. Member for Nuneaton (Mr. Leslie Huckfield). Will no hon. Gentleman opposite argue in support of the private enterprise shopkeeper who contributes more than anyone to the local rates and thereby provides the local amenities? I concede that the surplus income from parking meters, if any, should be properly spent on, for example, off-street parking facilities, highway improvements to keep through-traffic moving and in other ways to improve traffic flow.
But I am not prepared to concede that that surplus, if any, should be spent on what are called "the facilities" when that phrase means the setting up by local authorities of cafes which might make a loss and which will be run in competition with private enterprise cafe's which contribute to the rates. I am not prepared to concede that the surplus, if any, should be spent on establishing book shops to be operated, with subsidy, in competition with genuine private enterprise organisations which must work hard to make a profit on which taxes and rates are levied. There is no monopoly about a private enterprise organisation which has half-a-dozen book shops.
I know of a town in the Midlands which desperately needed a multi-storey car park. The corporation tried to get a number of firms interested in building the 2001 car park because it could not afford to build it out of the rates. Eventually, a private enterprise firm was persuaded to build it. There had not been a lot of interest among firms to take on the project because it was felt that the car park would not pay. However, in return for this firm agreeing to build it—this was not known until later—the corporation promised to paint double yellow lines on all the surrounding streets, so obliging people to park their cars in the multi-storey car park, so making the car park a paying proposition.
From the point of view of the multi-storey car park, that was fine and it was the sort of inducement which persuaded the company concerned to build it. But for the shopkeepers in the area, their business was restricted and the presence of the double yellow lines severely handicapped them. The rateable value of their property declined and their turnover went down. In using its power to virtually subsidise one firm, the local authority acted generously towards one company but ungenerously towards others, some of which were pushed out of business.
This sort of thing will be encouraged on an even greater scale if the surpluses of parking meters are spent on providing cafes and the other so-called amenities hon. Gentlemen opposite have in mind. We who represent retail shopkeepers throughout the country—a section of the community whose rates and taxes are unequalled by any other section—should see that their affairs are taken into account. I urge the Minister to think again. The surplus, if there is one, should be restricted to the roads—to improving our highways and transport system—but it should not involve a possible subsidy which could provide unfair competition to private enterprise retailers in our shopping streets.
It may be that the hon. Gentleman is concerned only with the Co-op. I am not against it, but I am also in favour of the private shopkeeper. I do not think that unfair subsidisation of this sort should make his job any more difficult.
§ 11.45 p.m.
§ Mr. Roy Roebuck (Harrow, East)1 disagree with the sentiments expressed by the bon. Baronet the Member for Peterborough (Sir Harmar Nicholls), 2002 because I believe that, in legislation, we should apply the simple Benthanite principle of the greatest good for the greatest number. The hon. Baronet is concerned about the individual shopkeeper. I think that we should be concerned for the good of the community as a whole.
It is obvious that what is needed in this modern age is a swift improvement in public transport. That does not militate against the individual private shopkeeper or motorist, because one of the problems facing shop owners in big city centres is that people cannot get to their shops because of congestion in the streets. A good example of the effect that this is having arose in Manchester, where a large concern closed down its premises and moved out to Wilmslow, where it was free from traffic congestion.
Nor is there much substance in the argument of the hon. Member for Truro (Mr. Geoffrey Wilson) about a promise made in a previous Parliament. It would be standing our constitutional principles on their heads if it were suggested that one Parliament could not undo what a previous one had done, or that Parliament was not sovereign. It would mean that decisions taken many years ago when circumstances were different would become fossilised.
I was pleased to hear my hon. Friend the Minister of State say that, to a large extent, decisions would be left to local authorities. Surely everyone wants to see local decisions affecting local people made by the people on the spot, and not by gentlemen in Whitehall or Westminster.
For those reasons, I support what my hon. Friend said.
§ Mr. Eric Lubbock (Orpington)I approach the Amendment from a slightly different angle, and it is one which is of great importance in my constituency. It concerns the provision of off-street car parking in the areas of outer London from which commuters travel in large numbers to work in the centre.
I think that it is true to say that more people from my constituency than from any other area of outer London travel daily to offices in Central London. At our local station, however, car parking facilities are totally inadequate. As a result, all the residential streets in the 2003 neighbourhood of the station are crowded with commuters' cars which are left there all day. One can imagine how annoying this is, not only to the ordinary private householders but to people like doctors, who find that they are unable to get their own cars out of their drives because the accesses are blocked by commuters' cars.
The situation has been getting worse in the last few years as car ownership has increased. For some reason, it is not a matter of mutual interest to the local authority and British Railways. Surely the sensible solution would be for British Railways, with a substantial area of land round the station, to provide parking facilities jointly with the local authority. The local authority provides free car parking which is intended for shoppers in the High Street, but it is taken up by commuters' cars.
British Railways have a great deal of land conveniently situated to the station where they charge £3 5s. a quarter for a season ticket. This is an anomaly. If facilities were provided jointly, first, cars would be kept off the streets, and, second, facilities in the neighbourhood of the shopping area could be kept for the use of shoppers and not taken up by commuters. More reasonable charges of commuters and shoppers could be made by means of the joint provision of these facilities. I tried for a long time to interest British Railways in such a scheme whereby their land could be used but some payment would come from the local authority for the use of those facilities. This could be considered under this Clause.
I do not go all the way with the hon. Member for Peterborough (Sir Harmar Nicholls), who said that provision might be made for cafes and book shops. That is a far-fetched example. It could well be that money spent under paragraph (e)
purposes of a project connected with the carrying out by the appropriate highway authority (whether or not the local authority) of any operation which within the meaning of the Highways Act 1959 constitutes the improvement of a highway in the local authority's area—which, after all, is extremely broad, though not necessarily including cafes and book shops—could include operations which would siphon off profits from the essential provision of car parks.
§ Sir Harmar NichollsThe previous paragraph says:
meeting costs incurred, whether by the local authority or by some other person, in the provision or operation of, or of facilities for, public passenger transport servicesFacilities for public passenger transport include trade.
§ Mr. LubbockI agree that the words may have the interpretation ascribed to them by the hon. Member, but it is highly unlikely that anything of the kind he mentioned would be carried out and the amount of money spent on them is probably minimal, but paragraph (e) is far the more important of these two paragraphs.
The hon. Member and I are not quarrelling with one another. We agree that the first thing to do is to provide adequate off-street car parking. Until we have done that we should not visualise any of the other purposes envisaged in paragraphs (d) and (e). If the Government are not to encourage local authorities and transport undertakings to get together in the manner I have suggested, which would make a very significant contribution towards decreasing congestion in Central London, they are severely to blame. The one way in which congestion in the centre of large cities can be relieved is to make it more convenient for commuters to leave their cars in surburban areas and travel into the centre by train or bus.
§ Mr. Harry Howarth (Wellingborough)Does not the hon. Member agree that London Transport is doing a tremendous amount in this respect and that all over the area car parks are made available for this purpose?
§ Mr. LubbockI have had considerable discussion with London Transport and I have talked to Mr. Holmes about it. He has told me of the schemes undertaken, but he would be the first to admit that those schemes are nothing like adequate for the number of car owners who would use the facilities if they were provided more extensively.
I will be parochial and say that Orpington is particularly important because of the number of commuters who come from there, but the same is true of Watford and other places.
§ Mr. RoebuckStanmore.
§ Mr. LubbockStanmore as well. London Transport has land available in those places. I hope that the Government will respond favourably and assure us that the other purposes mentioned in paragraphs (d) and (e) will not be carried out until there is more adequate provision for off-street parking in Greater London.
§ Mr. Ron LewisThe hon. Gentleman the Member for Orpington (Mr. Lubbock) will forgive me if I do not follow him in his remarks. I apologise to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Tavistock (Mr. Michael Heseltine) for not being here at the beginning of his speech. On this matter there is a world of difference between the two sides of the House. I, and, I think, the majority of us on this side, are all in favour of municipal enterprise. I would like to see an extension of municipal enterprise, even if it means using the money to take over or open up restaurants and what have you. I am speaking personally and for myself now.
What I was saying to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Peterborough (Sir Harmar Nicholls) was that, although he is so afraid of municipal enterprise, some of the greatest Tory-controlled local authorities are operating municipal enterprise
§ and we never hear a word of complaint about it from hon. Gentlemen on his side of the House. I refer to Birmingham, Bournemouth, Folkestone, Torquay and various seaside resorts which have their own catering establishments—and are doing a real good job of work. I would like to see greater extension of this and I hope the Bill will encourage local authorities to do it.
§ Mr. BessellWould the hon. Gentleman not agree that the money for that is not being provided out of the pockets of motorists? That, I think, was the point of the hon. Baronet the Member for Peterborough (Sir Harmar Nicholls).
§ Mr. LewisWith all respect to the hon. Member for Bodmin (Mr. Bessell), I do not think that it makes any difference, provided we get extension of municipal enterprise. What was the difference between the money coming out of the pockets of the motorists or out of the pockets of the ratepayers, when those municipal enterprises were set up at the various seaside resorts?
§ Question put, That the Amendment be made: —
§ The House divided: Ayes 220, Noes 256.
2009| Division No. 201.] | AYES | [11.59 p.m. |
| Alison, Michael (Barkston Ash) | Cary, Sir Robert | Gilmour, Ian (Norfolk, C.) |
| Allason, James (Kernel Hempstead) | Chichestcr-Clark, R. | Gilmour, Sir John (Fife, E.) |
| Astor, John | Clark, Henry | Glyn, Sir Richard |
| Atkins, Humphrey (M't'n & M'd'n) | Clegg, Walter | Goober, Rt. Hn. J. B. |
| Awdry, Daniel | Cooke, Robert | Goodhart, Philip |
| Baker, Kenneth (Acton) | Cooper-Key, Sir Neill | Goodhew, Victor |
| Baker, W. H. K. (Banff) | Corfield, F. V. | Gower, Raymond |
| Balniel, Lord | Costain, A. P. | Grant, Anthony |
| Batsford, Brian | Crouch, David | Grant-Ferris, R. |
| Beamish, Col. Sir Tufton | Crowder, F. P. | Gresham Cooke, R. |
| Bell, Ronald | Cunningham, Sir Knox | Grieve, Percy |
| Berry, Hn. Anthony | Dalkeith, Earl of | Griffiths, Eldon (Bury St. Edmunds) |
| Bessell, Peter | Dance, James | Gurden, Harold |
| Biffen, John | Davidson, James(Aberdeenshire, W.) | Hall, John (Wycombe) |
| Biggs-Davison, John | Dean, Paul (Somerset, N.) | Hall-Davis, A. G. F. |
| Black, Sir Cyril | Deedes, Rt. Hn. W. F. (Ashford) | Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury) |
| Blaker, Peter | Digby, Simon Wingfield | Harris, Frederic (Croydon, N.W.) |
| Boardman, Tom (Leicester, S.W.) | Dodds-Parker, Douglas | Harrison, Brian (Maldon) |
| Body, Richard | Doughty, Charles | Harrison, Col. Sir Harwood (Eye) |
| Bossom, Sir Clive | Drayson, G. B. | Harvey, Sir Arthur Vere |
| Boyd-Carpenter, Rt. Hn. John | du Cann, Rt. Hn. Edward | Harvie Anderson, Miss |
| Boyle, Rt. Hn. Sir Edward | Eden, Sir John | Hastings, Stephen |
| Braine, Bernard | Elliot Capt. Walter (Carshalton) | Hawkins, Paul |
| Brawls, John | Elliott, R.W.(N'c'tle-upon-Tyne, N.) | Heald, Rt. Hn. Sir Lionel |
| Brinton, Sir Tatton | Emery, Peter | Heath, Rt. Hn. Edward |
| Bromley-Davenport, Lt.-Col. Sir Walter | Errington, Sir Eric | Heseltine, Michael |
| Brown, Sir Edward (Bath) | Farr, John | Higgins, Terence L. |
| Bruce-Gardyne, J. | Fisher, Nigel | Hiley, Joseph |
| Bryan, Paul | Fletcher-Cooke, Charles | Hill, J. E. B. |
| Buchanan-Smith, Alick(Angus, N & M) | Fortescue, Tim | Hogg, Rt. Hn. Quintin |
| Buck, Antony (Colchester) | Foster, Sir John | Holland, Philip |
| Bullus, Sir Eric | Fraser, Rt. Hn. Hugh(St'ftord & Stone) | Hooson, Emlyn |
| Burden, F. A. | Galbraith, Hn. T. G. | Hordern, Peter |
| Campbell, Gordon | Gibson-Watt, David | Hornby, Richard |
| Carr, Rt. Hn. Robert | Giles, Rear-Adm. Morgan | Howell, David (Guildford) |
| Hunt, John | Mott-Radclyffe, Sir Charles | Sinclair, Sir George |
| Hutchison, Michael Clark | Munro-Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh | Smith, Dudley (W'wlck & L'mington) |
| Iremonger, T. L. | Murton, Oscar | Smith, John (London & W'minster) |
| Irvine, Bryant Godman (Rye) | Neave, Airey | Speed, Keith |
| Jenkin, Patrick (Woodford) | Nicholls, Sir Harmar | Stainton, Keith |
| Johnston, Russell (Inverness) | Noble, Rt. Hn. Michael | Steel, David (Roxburgh) |
| Jones, Arthur (Northants, S.) | Nott, John | Stodart, Anthony |
| Kaberry, Sir Donald | Onslow, Cranley | Stoddart-Scott, Col. Sir M. (Ripon) |
| Kerby, Capt. Henry | Orr, Capt. L. P. S. | Tapsell, Peter |
| Kershaw, Anthony | Orr-Ewing, Sir Ian | Taylor, Sir Charles (Eastbourne) |
| Kimball, Marcus | Page, Graham (Crosby) | Taylor, Edward M. (G'gow, Cathcart) |
| King, Evelyn (Dorset, S.) | Page, John (Harrow, W.) | Taylor, Frank (Moss Side) |
| Kirk, Peter | Pardoe, John | Teeling, Sir William |
| Kitson, Timothy | Pearson, Sir Frank (Clitheroe) | Temple, John M. |
| Knight, Mrs. Jill | Peel, John | Thatcher, Mrs. Margaret |
| Lambton, Viscount | Percival, Ian | Turton, Rt. Hn. R. H. |
| Lancaster, Col. C. G. | Peyton, John | van Straubenzee, W. R. |
| Lane, David | Pike, Miss Mervyn | Vaughan-Morgan, Rt. Hn. Sir John |
| Legge-Bourke, Sir Harry | Pink, R. Bonner | Vickers, Dame Joan |
| Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland) | Pounder, Rafton | Walker, Peter (Worcester) |
| Lloyd, Ian (P'tsm'th, Langstone) | Powell, Rt. Hn. J. Enoch | Wall, Patrick |
| Lubbock, Eric | Price, David (Eastleigh) | Walters, Dennis |
| MacArthur, Ian | Prior, J. M. L. | Webster, David |
| Maclean, Sir Fitzroy | Pym, Francis | Wells, John (Maidstone) |
| McMaster, Stanley | Quennell, Miss J. M. | Whitelaw, Rt. Hn. William |
| Macmillan, Maurice (Farnham) | Ramsden, Rt. Hn. James | Williams, Donald (Dudley) |
| Maddan, Martin | Rawlinson, Rt. Hn. Sir Peter | Wills, Sir Gerald (Bridgwater) |
| Maginnis, John E. | Renton, Rt. Hn. Sir David | Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro) |
| Marples, Rt. Hn. Ernest | Rhys Williams, Sir Brandon | Winstanley, Dr. M. p. |
| Marten, Neil | Ridley, Hn. Nicholas | Wolrige-Gordon, Patrick |
| Maude, Angus | Rodgers, Sir John (Sevenoaks) | Wood, Rt. Hn. Richard |
| Mawby, Ray | Rossi, Hugh (Hornsey) | Woodnutt, Mark |
| Mills, Peter (Torrington) | Royle, Anthony | Worsley, Marcus |
| Mills, Stratton (Belfast, N.) | Russell, Sir Roland | Wylie, N. R. |
| Miscampbell, Norman | St. John-Stevas, Norman | Younger, Hn. George |
| Mitchell, David (Basingstoke) | Scott, Nicholas | |
| Monro, Hector | Scott-Hopkins, James | |
| Montgomery, Fergus | Sharpies, Richard | TELLERS FOR THE AYES: |
| More, Jasper | Shaw, Michael (Sc'b'gh & Whitby) | Mr. Reginald Eyre and |
| Morrison, Charles (Devizes) | Silvester, Frederick | Mr. Bernard Weatherill. |
| NOES | ||
| Albu, Austen | Craddock, George (Bradford, S.) | Fowler, Gerry |
| Allaun, Frank (Salford, E.) | Crawshaw, Richard | Fraser, John (Norwood) |
| Alldritt, Walter | Cronin, John | Freeson, Reginald |
| Allen, Scholefield | Crosland, Rt. Hn. Anthony | Galpern, Sir Myer |
| Anderson, Donald | Crossman, Rt. Hn. Richard | Gardner, Tony |
| Archer, Peter | Cullen, Mrs. Alice | Garrett, W. E. |
| Armstrong, Ernest | Dalyell, Tam | Gourlay, Harry |
| Atkins, Ronald (Preston, N.) | Davidson, Arthur (Accrington) | Gray, Dr. Hugh (Yarmouth) |
| Bacon, Rt. Hn. Alice | Davies, Ednyfed Hudson (Conway) | Greenwood, Rt. Hn Anthony |
| Bagier, Gordon A. T. | Davies, G. Elfed (Rhondda, E.) | Gregory, Arnold |
| Barnes, Michael | Davies, Dr. Ernest (Stretford) | Griffiths, David (Rother, Valley) |
| Barnett, Joel | Davies, Harold (Leek) | Gunter, Rt. Hn. R. J. |
| Bence, Cyril | Davies, Ifor (Gower) | Hamling, William |
| Benn, Rt. Hn. Anthony Wedgwood | de Freitas, Rt. Hn. Sir Geoffrey | Hannan, William |
| Bennett, James (G'gow, Bridgeton) | Dell, Edmund | Harper, Joseph |
| Binns, John | Dempsey, James | Harrison, Walter (Wakefield) |
| Bishop, E. S. | Dewar, Donald | |
| Blackburn, F. | Diamond, Rt. Hn. John | Haseldine, Norman |
| Blenkinsop, Arthur | Dickens, James | Hattersley, Roy |
| Boardman, H. (Leigh) | Dobson, Ray | Hazell, Bert |
| Booth, Albert | Doig, Peter | Healey, Rt. Hn. Denis |
| Boyden, James | Driberg, Tom | Hooley, Frank |
| Braddock, Mrs. E. M. | Dunn, James A. | Houghton, Rt. Hn. Douglas |
| Bradley, Tom | Dunnett, Jack | Howarth, Harry (Wellingborough) |
| Brooks, Edwin | Dunwoody, Mrs. Gwyneth (Exeter) | Howarth, Robert (Bolton, E.) |
| Broughton, Dr. A. D. D. | Dunwoody, Dr. John (F'th & C'b'e) | Howie, W. |
| Brown, Hugh D. (G'gow, Provan) | Eadie, Alex | Hoy, James |
| Brown, Bob(N'c'tle-upon-Tyne, W.) | Edwards, Robert (Bilston) | Huckfield, Leslie |
| Brown, R. W. (Shoreditch & F'bury) | Edwards, William (Merioneth) | Hughes, Rt. Hn. Cledwyn (Anglesey) |
| Buchan, Norman | Ellis, John | Hughes, Emrys (Ayrshire, S.) |
| Buchanan, Richard (G'gow, Sp'burn) | English, Michael | Hughes, Roy (Newport) |
| Butter, Mrs. Joyce (Wood Green) | Ennals, David | Hunter, Adam |
| Cant. R. B. | Ensor, David | Hynd, John |
| Carmichael, Neil | Evans, Albert (Islington, S.W.) | Irvine, Sir Arthur (Edge Hill) |
| Carter-Jones, Lewis | Faulds, Andrew | Jackson, Colin (B'h'se & Spenb'gh) |
| Castle, Rt. Hn. Barbara | Fitch, Alan (Wigan) | Jackson, Peter M. (High Peak) |
| Coe, Denis | Fletcher, Ted (Darlington) | Jay, Rt. Hn. Douglas |
| Coleman, Donald | Foley, Maurice | Jeger, Mrs.Lena(H'b'n & St.P'cras, S.) |
| Concannon, J. D. | Foot, Rt. Hn. Sir Dingle (Ipswich) | Jenkins, Hugh (Putney) |
| Conlan, Bernard | Foot, Michael (Ebbw Vale) | Jenkins, Rt. Hn. Roy (Stechford) |
| Corbet, Mrs. Freda | Forrester, John | Johnson, Carol (Lewisham, S.) |
| Johnson, James (K'ston-on-Hull, W.) | Milne, Edward (Blyth) | Ross, Rt. Hn. William |
| Jones, Rt. Hn. Sir Elwyn (W.Ham, S.) | Mitchell, R. C. (S'th'pton, Test) | Shaw, Arnold (llford, S.) |
| Jones, J. Idwal (Wrexham) | Morgan, Elystan (Cardiganshire) | Sheldon, Robert |
| Jones, T. Aleu (Rhondda, West) | Morris, Alfred (Wythenshawe) | Shore, Rt. Hn. Peter (Stepney) |
| Judd, Frank | Morris, Charles R. (Openshaw) | Short, Rt. Hn. Edward (N'c'tle-u-Tyne) |
| Kerr, Mrs. Arme (R'ter & Chatham) | Morris, John (Aberavon) | Silkin, Rt. Hn. John (Deptford) |
| Kerr, Russell (Feltham) | Moyle, Roland | Silkin, Hn. S. C. (Dulwich) |
| Lawson, George | Murray, Albert | Silverman, Julius (Aston) |
| Ledger, Ron | Neal, Harold | Slater, Joseph |
| Lee, John (Reading) | Newens, Stan | Small, William |
| Lestor, Miss Joan | Noel-Baker, Rt. Hn. Philip (Derby, S.) | Snow, Julian |
| Lever, Harold (Cheetham) | Norwood, Christopher | Spriggs, Leslie |
| Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) | Ogden, Eric | Stewart, Rt. Hn. Michael |
| Lipton, Marcus | O'Malley, Brian | Storehouse, John |
| Lomas, Kenneth | Orme, Stanley | Strauss, Rt. Hn. G. R. |
| Loughlin, Charles | Oswald, Thomas | Summerskill, Hn. Dr. Shirley |
| Lyon, Alexander W. (York) | Owen, Dr. David (Plymouth, S'tn) | Swain, Thomas |
| Lyons, Edward (Bradford, E.) | Owen, Will (Morpeth) | Swingler, Stephen |
| Mabon, Dr. J. Dickson | Page, Derek (King's Lynn) | Taverne, Dick |
| McBride, Neli | Paget, R. T. | Thomas, Rt. Hn. George |
| McCann, John | Palmer, Arthur | Tinn, James |
| MacColl, James | Park, Trevor | Tomney, Frank |
| MacDermot, Niall | Parker, John (Dagenham) | Urwin, T. W. |
| Macdonald, A. H. | Parkin, Ben (Paddington, N.) | Varley, Eric G. |
| McGuire, Michael | Parkyn, Brian (Bedford) | Wainwright, Edwin (Dearne Valley) |
| McKay, Mrs. Margaret | Pavitt, Laurence | Walden, Brian (All Saints) |
| Mackenzie, Gregor (Rutherglen) | Pearson, Arthur (Pontypridd) | Walker, Harold (Doncaster) |
| Mackie, John | Peart, Rt. Hn. Fred | Watkins, David (Consett) |
| Mackintosh, John P. | Pentland, Norman | Watkins, Tudor (Brecon & Radnor) |
| Maclennan, Robert | Perry, Ernest G. (Battersea, S.) | Wellbeloved, James |
| McMillan, Tom (Glasgow, C.) | Perry, George H. (Nottingham, S.) | Whitlock, William |
| McNamara, J.Kevin | Prentice, Rt. Hn. R. E. | Williams, Alan (Swansea, W.) |
| MacPherson, Malcolm | Price, Thomas (Westhoughton) | Williams, Alan Lee (Hornchurch) |
| Mahon, Peter (Preston, S.) | Probert, Arthur | Williams, Clifford (Abertillery) |
| Mallalieu, E. L. (Brigg) | Rankin, John | Williams, Mrs. Shirley (Hitchin) |
| Mallalieu, J. P. W. (Huddersfield, E.) | Rees, Merlyn | Willis, Rt. Hn. George |
| Manuel, Archie | Reynolds, G. W. | Wilson, Rt. Hn. Harold (Huyton) |
| Marks, Kenneth | Rhodes, Geoffrey | Wilson, William (Coventry, S.) |
| Marquand, David | Richard, Ivor | Winnick, David |
| Marsh, Rt. Hn. Richard | Roberts, Goronwy (Caernarvon) | Woodburn, Rt. Hn. A. |
| Mason, Rt. Hn. Roy | Rodgers, William (Stockton) | Woof, Robert |
| Mayhew, Christopher | Robertson, John (Paisley) | Yates, Victor |
| Mendelson, J. J. | Robinson, Rt. Hn. Kenneth (St.P'c'as) | |
| Mikardo, lan | Robinson, W. O. J. (Walth'stow, E.) | TELLERS FOR THE NOES: |
| Millan, Bruce | Roebuck, Roy | Mr.Charles Grey and |
| Miller, Dr. M. S. | Rose, Paul | Mr. Ioan L. Evans |