Rent officers, holding appointments as such by virtue of Part IV of the Rent Act 1968, shall have the duty of giving advice concerning grants under Part I of this Act to persons
(upon reasonable request therefor) who are applicants or prospective applicants for grants or who are builders or developers interested in works for which grants may be made; and such Rent Officers shall be responsible for maintaining reasonable liaison between the local authority, on the one hand, and the owners and occupiers of property which is being or is capable of being improved and the
builders and developers who are or may be interested therein, on the other hand.—[Mr. Clegg.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.
§ Mr. Clegg
I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time.
On the centre pages of the Evening News yesterday I found a whole page of what I took at first to be a Labour Party manifesto, with a collection of portraits. On further inspection, however, I found that the photographs were of those fine people, the rent officers. The words of the advertisement were very appropriate:Call in for a friendly chat. You do not need an appointment. We will make sure your rent is fair".That last statement will probably make a cold shiver run up and down the spine of the hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun.)
I have a great respect for rent officers, who have had remarkable success. The system has worked much better than I thought it would. The new Clause continues a line of thought which we expressed in Committee, which arose because the building industry and applicants had difficulty in getting technical guidance and information about their entitlement to grants from certain local authorities. We suggested that an officer should be appointed to administer grants, but we were told that it was not necessary to put that in the Bill, since the Clause only said that they "may" appoint, which would leave the authorities free.
This new Clause is a different matter. It would lay the duty on someone appointed not by the local authority and who would be outside the authority's scope. Under the Bill, rent officers will have to study its effects and decide on the rents to be charged when the work has been done. They are therefore bound to build up a considerable fund of experience. We feel that they could assist not only the applicants but builders or developers interested in works for which grants may be given. We see their capacity rather as advisory officers who can maintain a liaison between local authorities making and administering the grants and the people on the receiving end.
This is the sort of duty with which the Government have some sympathy. We have occasionally discussed ways and 538 means of bringing to people's notice the way in which they can get grants. One difficulty in the past has been that schemes for grants have not worked as well as they should, because of a lack of knowledge of entitlements. If the rent officers were brought in, that would no longer apply. From the beginning, one could know from him what sort of rent was likely and what sort of help was available under the standard grants and the discretionary grants.
The new Clause would set a pattern which would make administration of these grants much easier and more satisfactory and would undoubtedly provide a line service for the public.
§ Mr. Frank Allaun (Salford, East)
I have no doubt that this proposal would be a great advantage for property owners. The Bill and the Amendments, particularly those which we are now discussing, are of great value to property owners, but what service will be supplied for the tenants? The tenant will suffer from this—
§ Mr. Allaun
Not at all. The landlord will ask the rent officer what rent he could charge if he put in a bathroom, and if the rent officer said that he could probably get treble the landlord would go ahead and use his compulsory powers and the tenant would suffer. I hope that the Minister will remember that this Bill is biased against the tenant.
§ Sir D. Glover
I thought that my hon. Friend the Member for North Fylde (Mr. Clegg) made a powerful case for the new Clause, and I was surprised at the remarks of the hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun). What often surprises me about our procedures is that we go through all the arrangements of making assistance available for various people and then have a genius for keeping it under the carpet, so that no one knows which arrangements are available—
§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I do not think that the hon. Gentleman heard the beginning of the debate. We have 40 debates before us. Hon. Members should speak about the new Clause at the moment.
§ Sir D. Glover
I thought that I was doing so, Mr. Speaker. I was referring to the advisory duties of the rent officers. When certain things are available, someone should be able to give advice. In a very able speech, my hon. Friend suggested that the rent officer should give the advice. In that respect, the new Clause would help.
What surprises me about the hon. Member for Salford, East is that, even though this may involve an increase in rent, it seems anti-social to condemn someone to live in a property, perhaps at a low rent, which, with an improvement grant for a bathroom, could become a reasonable home in which the hon. Gentleman would like his constituents to live.
The new Clause is only asking that the rent officers shall have advisory duties relating to grants, which means that many people, perhaps with one or two units and with very little skilled knowledge of these matters, could ask advice about making the accommodation more satisfactory for the tenants—and, admittedly, for themselves, the landlords. I assume that, having made these improvements, they would be able to increase the rents, but the new Clause would be very valuable, particularly to a small landlord and to the tenants whose accommodation would be improved. I hope that the Minister will think this helpful to the working of the various Acts dealing with grants and modernisation, and that it will help this system to work more efficiently.
§ Mr. Maddan
I had not intended to speak until the hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun) gave his reason for opposing the new Clause. It was so contrary to the whole purpose of the Bill that I must make one point which has not been stressed so far. The only validity that his objection could have is if the whole basis of the Bill were false and against the interests of tenants. Since the Minister brought it forward in good faith, he will not accept that argument, at least. In those circumstances, I hope that he will accept the new Clause, or at least the spirit of it, since it is designed to help make the Bill work as well as possible.
§ 6.30 p.m.
§ Mr. Allason
I remind the hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun) 540 that the object of the Bill is to improve houses. It follows, since houses are lived in by people, that we want to benefit not the houses but the people. People will not suffer if their houses are improved. The trouble is that the hon. Gentleman has a private quarrel with his right hon. Friend about whether a system of fair rents should be introduced. He does not want such a system, but it does not entitle him to argue that tenants will suffer if their houses are improved; and the new Clause is merely designed to see that houses are improved in the right way.
Hon. Members will be aware of the difficulties that are encountered when owners are trying to be persuaded to improve their property. They are often frightened off because of the complicated procedures that are involved. We gather that the Minister is to produce yet another pamphlet explaining the new incentives and how they will work. The small owner is always at a disadvantage.
It is for these reasons that we need in the market-place, so to speak, somebody who will be aware of new bright ideas and how to explain them to small owners, who normally do not read the details of the latest developments in the technical journals. We need somebody to do this job who is not just in touch with the latest ideas but knows his locality and the houses that most need improving.
§ Mr. Simon Mahon
The new Clause deals primarily with rent officers. Does the hon. Gentleman consider that, in the whole orbit of local and national government, rent officers are the best qualified people to give advice of this kind?
§ Mr. Allason
Somebody is needed to do this work. It is an attractive idea to have somebody who is aware of local conditions but who, not being a local official, is neutral. We have ready to hand rent officers, who are the friends of all concerned. They are used to settling rent problems and are, therefore, familiar with the problems of both landlords and tenants. They are experienced in dealing with the matters with which we are concerned.
Hon. Members voiced a certain amount of suspicion when rent officers were established. By now, however, we know them to be extremely useful, helpful and knowledgeable people. I appreciate that this additional work would mean that their numbers would have to be increased. 541 However, we would not need highly qualified people to explain these procedures, so that it should not prove difficult to recruit more rent officers. We need people to do this job because they are interested and passionately devoted to the creation of good housing. The rent officer fills the bill.
In Committee we discussed the number of rent officers who might be needed, not just for this proposal but as a result of the Bill as a whole. It would, therefore, be ridiculous for the Government to suggest that the new Clause is impracticable because more rent officers would have to be recruited. If Parliament wills that rent officers must do this job, the Executive cannot stand in the way, and more rent officers will have to be found.
§ Mr. Hawkins
I take issue with the hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun) who, I know, is passionately devoted to the provision of better housing. However, on all occasions such as this his remarks seem to indicate that he would rather have tenants living in squalor than have their houses improved. The Bill is concerned with improving houses and getting the whole stock of houses up to a better standard.
The Labour Party has been at pains to point out that landlords do not improve their houses. As the Bill will, we hope, result in houses being improved, it must be agreed that somebody is needed locally to help to see that the job is done. Owner-occupiers, and particularly the elderly, living in, for example, small terraced houses, need assistance and friendly advice from somebody who specialises in these matters. They need somebody to turn to who will explain the best way for the improvements to be made and how to fill in the necessary forms.
The answer to the hon. Member for Bootle (Mr. Simon Mahon) is that we endeavoured in Committee to secure the appointment of people on local authority staffs to do this work. That proposition was rejected. If the hon. Gentleman has an alternative suggestion, I would be pleased to hear it.
§ Mr. Speaker
Order. With the best will in the world, the hon. Member for Bootle (Mr. Simon Mahon) cannot make any such suggestion now. It is a question of discussing what the new Clause suggests.
§ Mr. Hawkins
I have had a considerable amount to do with grants and improvements of this kind. I have found that even trained professional people are sometimes at a loss because there is not one person in a local authority dealing specifically with matters of this kind. The rent officer has intimate knowledge of his area and could perform this task usefully.
I rather disagree with my hon. Friend the Member for Hemel Hempstead (Mr. Allason) that a great increase would be required in the number of rent officers. I believe that the existing stock of rent officers could do this work, in addition to their present tasks.
§ Mr. Lubbock
Rent officers are capable of performing duties other than those suggested in the new Clause. The Joint Parliamentary Secretary will be aware of what I have in mind, for it would be improper for me to develop that theme on this occasion.
Many rent officers are under-loaded at present and would have no difficulty if the duties proposed in the new Clause were assigned to them. I wonder, however, if Conservative hon. Members have thought whether rent officers would be the right people to do this job. I do not believe that they would be, and I say that declaring an interest as a director of a small building company.
Building firms which specialise in conversions and improvements are the most capable people to advise clients on how this would should be undertaken, not only technically but from the point of view of filling in the necessary forms, putting in applications to local authorities and going through all the administrative procedures that are involved. Building companies do this work as a matter of course. Indeed, it is somewhat of an insult to suggest in the new Clause that among those to be advised on these matters by rent officers are builders and developers. Are Conservative hon. Members suggesting that builders and developers know less than rent officers about how to get in touch with local authorities and of the latest technical improvements about which one can read in the trade journals?
§ Mr. Lubbock
That only means that there must be a lot of incompetent builders who may soon find themselves out of business, with the result that my firm will have more. [Interruption.] The building industry is varied in the capabilities of the firms which comprise it. One is frequently reading about building firms going bankrupt. I do not underestimate the difficulties that the building industry faces. However, the procedures which we are discussing are not as complicated as some hon. Members may think for firms which specialise in this work and which do not try to cover the whole spectrum of new work for local authorities and private clients and also do conversions and improvements for both types of client.
Companies which specialise in conversions and improvements frequently employ experts to oversee the work. I do not believe that the difficulties are nearly as serious as the hon. Member for North Fylde (Mr. Clegg) has made out today or has maintained in correspondence concerning the building industry. Indeed, it is a slur on the industry to suggest that it needs the advice of rent officers, who have no expertise in this sphere and who are concerned with totally different matters following the passage of the 1965 Act.
To divert the attention of rent officers away from their present activities and into technical questions connected with improving property would be wrong. It would mean their undertaking additional training, their energies would be absorbed in this task and they would be prevented from branching out into new fields in which I hope the Minister will later in the debate be persuaded they should become involved.
For these reasons the new Clause is bad. I am satisfied that once the building industry has full knowledge of the contents of the Bill it will get down to the job we want it to tackle efficiently with the result that many more houses, and particularly older ones, will be brought up to date.
§ 6.45 p.m.
§ Mr. Costain
Like the hon. Member for Orpington (Mr. Lubbock), I must declare my interest in that I, too, am a director of a small building company.
I disagree with the hon. Gentleman because the building industry, as well as others, needs somebody to advise on these matters. Perhaps the hon. Member for Orpington has not spent as long in the practical side of the industry as I have. The Government are expecting to open a new phase of development and spend £40 million to improve property. It must be agreed that there are not sufficient people in the building industry with the knowledge that rent officers may be able to pass on to those concerned.
§ Mr. Costain
We must have a co-ordinated effort. Far be it from me to recommend the appointment of more civil servants. I am not doing that. The rent officer, because of his present duties, is probably best able to judge what accommodation in his area needs improving. We need somebody to advise property owners and developers because, as usual, the hon. Member for Orpington has got his facts wrong. The majority of houses are owned not by builders but by private individuals.
§ Mr. Costain
If the hon. Gentleman wishes to interrupt. I hope that he will do so in the correct Parliamentary manner and not from a sedentary position.
§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I remind the House that we are on Report, which is somewhat more formal than when we are in Committee.
§ Mr. Costain
I welcome your protection in this matter, Mr. Speaker.
A number of small owners of rented property are not experienced. When a new grant of this sort is brought out by any Government there is immediately a crop of semi-experts who try to set up in business to advise these somewhat innocent people. These people are attracted because they think that if they take that advice they might get the grant. 545 The rent officer knows the type of accommodation which lets and he knows what is lacking in amenities. He is the perfect person to do this job. At present many rent officers are not fully occupied. The Government should adopt this sensible new Clause.
§ Mr. MacColl
The trouble about members of the Opposition is that they are in a very aggressive and dictatorial mood at the moment. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] The general idea that the rent officer should interest himself in improvements and helping people who go to see him is common ground, but why have this pretentious Clause putting a statutory duty on him? It says not that he "may" but that he "shall" have the duty of giving advice.
§ Mr. MacColl
I think that is so, but if the duty is to be put on the rent officer to maintain a reasonable liaison, I wonder whether hon. Members who have some experience with local government have considered how this would work with a local authority—a statutory body responsible for administering the grant system, elected democratically and conscious of its rights—agreeing to have a rent officer, not in a friendly, helpful, co-operative relationship, but with a statutory duty to liaise between the authority and its constituents.
Is the rent officer, like the Citizens Advice Bureau, to have available information about grants and be able to tell people where to go to get them, giving them the extension number in the town hall where they can get the information? Many conscientious rent officers would do that without thinking they were departing from their normal work. Public health inspectors have a technical knowledge and standing as local authority officers. They could do this kind of work, but I do not think it would be wise to place a statutory duty on them to do it.
There is a special difficulty about the rent officer. He is appointed by the clerk of the local authority, but he is not the servant of the clerk and is not answerable to him for decisions he makes. Sometimes this gives rise to an unwarrantable 546 suspicion that the rent officer is the stooge of the local council. It is very important for a rent officer with any sense and wisdom to be careful to make clear that he is in no way a servant of the local authority but is independent and giving his own decisions which can be challenged only in the traditional way by assessment by a local committee. I am sure that rent officers would like to give information and join in partnership with other bodies in trying to improve property, but they should not have this laid on them as a statutory duty.
§ Mr. Graham Page
We cannot be other than dissatisfied with the answer the Parliamentary Secretary has given. On the last point he made I rather doubt whether if a rent officer spends his time advising on these sort of matters he is still within the duties of his appointment. I think it doubtful whether he would be right without some authority given by statute to give that sort of advice. He is appointed to do a particular duty. He is a central Government servant under the town clerk, but not under the local authority.
I assure the Parliamentary Secretary that we are not in any way in an aggressive or dictatorial mood. If it would please him to have the word "may" instead of "shall" in the new Clause we should be quite happy to make that change. Local authorities should realise that there should be some officer specifically appointed with the power to liaise with all concerned with applying for grants, or wishing to consider whether they can apply or what is to happen to the tenant when the landlord applies. It has been accepted for years that grants have not been taken up as we would wish them to be taken up. This is what the Bill is all about. Anything we can do to encourage people to understand grants and be ready to take them up should be done.
The criticism made by the hon. Member for Orpington (Mr. Lubbock) of the inclusion in the Clause of builders and developers is not justified. There are many who would welcome liaison between themselves and owners or occupiers of property. Although many building companies understand this job perfectly well and would advise people on it, others need assistance, not in their technical work, but in their relations with those who want to carry out repairs to their properties.
547 Individual owners need help in understanding what is meant by the grants and how they can use them. They need to know what their entitlements are and how families in houses where grants are to be made and improvements undertaken have to arrange their own affairs. The Parliamentary Secretary, in his paradise of bachelordom, does not understand what is meant by families re-arranging their lives. I know a little better as I heard during the last debate that I have become a grandfather for the first time. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] I know about the re-arranging of families and the difficulties faced when they have to move from a room because a bathroom is to be put in.
The hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun) said that this proposal would not help tenants; but we think it would. If a tenant can go to a rent officer and say, "The landlord wants to put a bathroom in my sitting-room. What can I do about it?", the rent officer can tell him how he can raise objections and get the landlord to give him other accommodation. How would an ordinary tenant know about that unless there were someone to whom he could apply? The rent officer is the right person to do this.
In Committee, the Parliamentary Secretary said:
If a rent officer is good at his job, and all London rent officers are outstanding, he becomes a sort of Citizens' Advice Bureau because he becomes a person to whom M.P.'s, landlords, tenants and others go to to get advice about the levels of rent.
A rent officer who can say, 'I know from my experience that that is too high a rent and you would be much wiser to agree a lower rent' is doing a tremendously valuable job. Such advice does not appear in the figures as a case dealt with, a decision taken, but it is part of his preventive work."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Standing Committee F, 20th March, 1969; col. 381.]
§ If that sort of action could be brought to bear on liaison between local authorities and individuals wanting to carry out improvements and between tenants and builders capable of doing the work, it would serve a very good purpose. It will not happen unless we put something definite in the Bill to oblige local authorities to think of this as a positive job and not merely as, "Perhaps we might appoint someone next year to do this". We should make it an obligation on them. Then I think the work will be done.
§ Question put, That the Clause be read a Second time:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 127, Noes 183.549
|Division No. 271.]||AYES||[6.55 p.m.|
|Alison, Michael (Barkston Ash)||Eiliot, Capt. Walter (Carshalton)||Knight, Mrs. Jill|
|Allason, James (Hemel Hempstead)||Elliott, R. W. (N 'c'tle-upon-Tyne, N.)||Lancaster, Col. C. G.|
|Atkins, Humphrey (M't'n & M'd'n)||Fletcher-Cooke, Charles||Legge-Bourke, Sir Harry|
|Awdry, Daniel||Fortescue, Tim||Lloyd, Rt. Hn. Selwyn (Wirral)|
|Baker, W. H. K. (Banff)||Foster, Sir John||MacArthur, Ian|
|Barber, Rt. Hn. Anthony||Gibson-Watt, David||McMaster, Stanley|
|Beamish, Col. Sir Tufton||Glover, Sir Douglas||McNair-Wilson, M. (Walthamstow, E.)|
|Bell, Ronald||Gower, Raymond||Maddan, Martin|
|Biffen, John||Grant, Anthony||Maginnis, John E.|
|Black, Sir Cyril||Grant-Ferris, Sir Robert||Maude, Angus|
|Boardman, Tom (Leicester, S. W.)||Grieve, Percy||Mawby, Ray|
|Boyd-Carpenter, Rt. Hn. John||Hall-Davis, A. G. F.||Maxwell-Hyslop, R. J.|
|Braine, Bernard||Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury)||Mills, Peter (Torrington)|
|Harris, Reader (Heston)||Mills, Stratton (Belfast, N.)|
|Brewis, John||Harrison, Brian (Maldon)||Montgomery, Fergus|
|Brinton, Sir Tatton||Hastings, Stephen||Morgan, Geraint (Denbigh)|
|Brown, Sir Edward (Bath)||Hawkins, Paul||Morgan-Giles, Rear-Adm.|
|Buchanan-Smith, Alick (Angus, N & M)||Heald, Rt. Hn. Sir Lionel||Munro-Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh|
|Bullus, Sir Eric||Heseltine, Michael||Nabarro, Sir Gerald|
|Burden, F. A.||Higgins, Terence L,||Nicholls, Sir Harmar|
|Campbell, B. (Oldham, W.)||Hill, J. E. B.||Noble, Rt. Hn. Michael|
|Campbell, Gordon (Moray & Nairn)||Holland, Philip||Nott, John|
|Carlisle, Mark||Hordern, Peter||Onslow, Cranley|
|Carr, Rt. Hn. Robert||Hornby, Richard||Page, Graham (Crosby)|
|Channon, H. P. G.||Hunt, John||Percival, Ian|
|Clark, Henry||Hutch son, Michael Clark||Pike, Miss Mervyn|
|Clegg, Walter||Iremonger, T. L.||Pink, R. Bonner|
|Cooke, Robert||Irvine, Bryant Godman (Rye)||Pounder, Rafton|
|Corfield, F. V.||Jenkin, Patrick (Woodford)||Powell, Rt. Hn. J. Enoch|
|Costain, A. P.||Jennings, J. C. (Burton)||Prior, J. M. L.|
|Crouch, David||Jones, Arthur (Northants, S.)||Pym, Francis|
|Cunningham, Sir Knox||Jopling, Michael||Ramsden, Rt. Hn. James|
|Currie, G. B. H.||Kaberry, Sir Donald||Rhys Williams, Sir Brandon|
|d'Avigdor-Goldsmid, Sir Henry||King, Evelyn (Dorset, S.)||Rossi, Hugh (Hornsey)|
|Russell, Sir Ronald||Thatcher, Mrs. Margaret||Wiggin, A. W.|
|Shaw, Michael (Sc'b'gh & Whitby)||Tilney, John||Williams, Donald (Dudley)|
|Silvester, Frederick||Turton, Rt. Hn. R. H.||Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)|
|Smith, John (London & W'minster)||van Straubenzee, W. R.||Wright, Esmond|
|Speed, Keith||Vaughan-Morgan, Rt. Hn. Sir John||Wylie, N. R.|
|Stainton, Keith||Waddington, David||Younger, Hn. George|
|Stoddart-scott, Col. Sir M.||Walker, Peter (Worcester)|
|Taylor, Sir Charles (Eastbourne)||Ward, Dame Irene||TELLERS FOR THE AYES:|
|Taylor, Frank (Moss Side)||Wells, John (Maidstone)||Mr. Reginald Eyre and|
|Temple, John M.||Whitelaw, Rt. Hn. William||Mr. Hector Monro.|
|Abse, Leo||Gray, Dr. Hugh (Yarmouth)||Mitchell, R. C. (S'th'pton, Test)|
|Allaun, Frank (Salford, E.)||Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Anthony||Morris, Alfred (Wythenshawe)|
|Anderson, Donald||Gregory, Arnold||Morris, Charles R. (Openshaw)|
|Archer, Peter||Gray, Charles (Durham)||Neal, Harold|
|Armstrong, Ernest||Griffiths, David (Rother Valley)|
|Ashley, Jack||Griffiths, Will (Exchange)||Newens, Stan|
|Atkins, Ronald (Preston, N.)||Gunter, Rt. Hn. R. J.||Norwood, Christopher|
|Atkinson, Norman (Tottenham)||Hamilton, William (Fife, W.)||Ogden, Eric|
|Bacon, Rt. Hn. Alice||Hannan, William||O'Malley, Brian|
|Bagier, Gordon A. T.||Harrison, Walter (Wakefield)||Oram, Albert E.|
|Barnett, Joel||Haseldine, Norman||Orbach, Maurice|
|Bidwell, Sydney||Hazell, Bert||Orme, Stanley|
|Bishop, E. S.||Herbison, Rt. Hn. Margaret||Oswald, Thomas|
|Blackburn, F.||Hooley, Frank||Owen, Will (Morpeth)|
|Blenkinsop, Arthur||Horner, John||Page, Derek (King's Lynn)|
|Boardman, H. (Leigh)||Howarth, Robert (Bolton, E.)||Palmer, Arthur|
|Hoy, Rt. Hn. James||Pannell, Rt. Hn. Charles|
|Booth, Albert||Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.)||Pardoe, John|
|Boyden, James||Hughes, Roy (Newport)||Park, Trevor|
|Bradley, Tom||Hynd, John||Pearson, Arthur (Pontypridd)|
|Bray, Dr. Jeremy||Janner, Sir Barnett||Peart, Rt. Hn. Fred|
|Brooks, Edwin||Jones, Dan (Burnley)||Perry, George H. (Nottingham, S.)|
|Broughton, Sir Alfred||Jones, Rt. Hn. Sir Elwyn (W. Ham, S.)||Prentice, Rt. Hn. R. E.|
|Brown, Rt. Hn. George (Belper)||Jones, T. Alec (Rhondda, West)||Price, Thomas (Westhoughton)|
|Brown, Hugh D. (G'gow, Provan)||Judd, Frank||Price, William (Rugby)|
|Brown, Bob (N'c'tle-upon-Tyne, W.)||Kelley, Richard||Probert, Arthur|
|Buchanan, Richard (G'gow, Sp'burn)||Kenyon, Clifford||Rankin, John|
|Butler, Herbert (Hackney, C.)||Kerr, Dr. David (W'worth, Central)||Rees, Merlyn|
|Concannon, J. D.||Kerr, Russell (Feltham)||Roberts, Albert (Normanton)|
|Craddock, George (Bradford, S.)||Lawson, George||Robertson, John (Paisley)|
|Crawshaw, Richard||Leadbitter, Ted||Rogers, George (Kensington, N.)|
|Crosland, Rt. Hn. Anthony||Lee, Rt. Hn. Frederik (Newton)||Ross, Rt. Hn. William|
|Dalyell, Tam||Lee, John (Reading)||Ryan, John|
|Darling, Rt. Hn. George||Lector, Miss Joan||Sheldon, Robert|
|Davidson, Arthur (Accrington)||Lever, Rt. Hn. Harold (Cheetham)||Shinwell, Rt. Hn. E.|
|Davidson, James (Aberdeenshire, W.)||Lewis, Arthur (W. Ham, N.)||Shore, Rt. Hn. Peter (Stepney)|
|Davies, Ednyfed Hudson (Conway)||Lewis, Ron (Carlisle)||Short, Rt. Hn. Edward (N'c'tle-u-Tyne)|
|Davies, G. Elfed (Rhondda, E.)||Lipton, Marcus||Silverman, Julius|
|Davies, Ifor (Gower)||Lubbock, Eric||Skeffington, Arthur|
|Delargy, Hugh||Lyon, Alexander W. (York)||Slater, Joseph|
|Dell, Edmund||Mabon, Dr. J. Dickson||Spriggs, Leslie|
|Dempsey, James||MacColl, James||Steele, Thomas (Dunbartonshire, W.)|
|Dewar, Donald||Macdonald, A. H.||Symonds, J. B.|
|Diamond, Rt. Hn. John||McGuire, Michael||Taverne, Dick|
|Dickens, James||McKay, Mrs. Margaret||Tinn, James|
|Dobson, Ray||Mackenz e, Alasdair (Ross & Crom'ty)||Tuck, Raphael|
|Doig, Peter||Mackintosh, John P.||Varley, Eric G.|
|Dunn, James A.||McNamara, J. Kevin||Wainwright, Edwin (Dearne Valley)|
|Dunnett, Jack||MacPherson, Malcolm||Wainwright, Richard (Colne Valley)|
|Ellis, John||Mahon, Peter (Preston, S.)||Walker, Harold (Doncaster)|
|English, Michael||Mahon, Simon (Bootle)||Wallace, George|
|Ensor, David||Mallalieu, E. L. (Brigg)||Watkins, David (Consett)|
|Evans, Albert (Islington, S. W.)||Mallalieu, J. P. W. (Huddersfield, E.)||Wellbeloved, James|
|Evans, Ioan L. (Birm'h'm, Yardley)||Manuel, Archie||Willey, Rt. Hn. Frederick|
|Fernyhough, E.||Mapp, Charles||Williams, Clifford (Abertillery)|
|Fletcher, Raymond (Ilkeston)||Marks, Kenneth||Winstanley, Dr. M. P.|
|Fletcher, Ted (Darlington)||Mason, Rt. Hn. Roy||Woodburn, Rt. Hn. A.|
|Foot, Michael (Ebbw Vate)||Mayhew, Christopher||Woof, Robert|
|Ford, Ben||Mellish, Rt. Hn. Robert|
|Forrester, John||Mendelson, John||TELLERS FOR THE NOES:|
|Freeson, Reginald||Millan, Bruce||Mr. Ernest G. Perry and|
|Gardner, Tony||Miller, Dr. M. S.||Mr. Joseph Harper.|
|Garrett, W. E.||Milne, Edward (Blyth)|