LAND COMMISSION (LEVY) (Hansard, 24 March 1969)

§ Mr. Evelyn King
I beg to ask leave to move the Adjournment of the House, under Standing Order No. 9, for the purpose of discussing a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration, namely, the necessity of the Government to make an immediate statement in respect of financial concessions to those charged levy under the Land Commission Act". I am perfectly aware, Mr. Speaker, as, is the House, that this matter was discussed last Friday. I raise it now only because there are fresh considerations which I shall outline as my speech proceeds.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. That sounds ominous. The hon. Gentleman cannot make a speech, for he is asking leave to move the Adjournment under Standing Order No. 9.

§ Mr. King
I will outline these fresh considerations as my representations to you proceed, Mr. Speaker.
I must show three things; that the matter is definite, important and urgent. I need only utter a few sentences to show that it is definite. There are hundreds of people in modest circumstances being asked for money, of which they are not possessed, by way of land levy. These are mainly young people who possess only a plot of land or a building. In many cases this is mort gaged to the hilt, and in a great many of these cases their furniture is also——

§ Mr. Albu
Is it in order for an hon. Member, when raising a point of order with you, to do so from notes, Mr. Speaker?

§ Mr. Speaker
There is nothing wrong in an hon. Member raising a point of order under Standing Order No. 9 from notes. However, what he must not do is to debate the issue on which he is seeking that a debate should take place under Standing Order No. 9.

§ Mr. King
That was not my intention Mr. Speaker, for I am merely pointing out how definite this matter is to those possessed of mortgages, with their land or property often mortgaged to the hilt, to be asked to pay further money which they often do not possess.
In showing that this matter is important, I draw attention to the fact that last Friday my hon. Friend the Member for Essex, South-East (Mr. Braine), who most hon. Members will agree does not frequently use intemperate language——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman is an old and experienced Parliamentarian. He must not, when making a submission under Standing Order No. 9, present the case which he would present if a debate under that Standing Order were granted.

§ Mr. King
I am merely trying to show, Mr. Speaker, that the Adjournment debate which I seek is important.
In doing that I was drawing attention to what my hon. Friend the Member for Essex, South-East said last Friday, when he described the effects of this Measure as heartless. He went on to say that it was causing some of his constituents misery and despair. I emphasise the importance of those words, since the Act is having the same effect on some of my constituents. If the matter is of vital importance to our constituents, it must be important to us.
I must then show that the issue is urgent, as I appreciate that your decision, Mr. Speaker, will rest on this factor. The best thing that I can do is to cite an actual case to illustrate why the issue is urgent. I have a constituent on whom there was raised a levy under the Land Commission Act of some £600 and——

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will pay heed to what the Chair has said. He cannot debate, in seeking the Adjournment of the House under Standing Order No. 9, the issue on which he is seeking the Adjournment.

§ Mr. King
With respect, Mr. Speaker, I am not debating it but submitting to you that it is urgent. I hope, therefore, that I will be allowed to state why I believe that it is urgent. In doing so I am quoting one case, and I promise to go no further than that.
In this case a levy of some £600 was raised. My constituent then went to a professional adviser, who got in touch with the Land Commission. The result of representations which were made was that the sum was reduced to £380. The professional adviser then wrote to his client, my constituent, and said that he had discussed the matter with the Land Commission.

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. This is an abuse of the procedure for making a submission under Standing Order No. 9. The hon. Gentleman is asking that the subject which he seeks to be debated should take precedence over the other business of the House. That is what he must talk about.

§ Mr. King
I am seeking to show that the matter is urgent, Mr. Speaker, and a small quotation will prove that it is.
My constituent was informed: Your final decision in this matter must be communicated within two months or else the original assessment stands. This is the point of the urgency. It has been widely stated that the Government intend to make concessions in this matter and that a statement is about to be made. What is a constituent in these circumstances to do if he is coming towards the end of the two-months' period? Nobody appears to know the nature of the statement that will be made, whether, when the concession is announced, it will be retrospective or, if it is retrospective, the date from which it will be retrospective.
People throughout the country are in the position of my constituent. They are being placed in an impossible position. If they now pay the amounts claimed from them they may lose any concession that may be given, while if they do not pay they may find themselves in an even worse position. I hope that I have proved that the matter is urgent. I therefore hope that the House will be allowed to discuss the issue.

§ Mr. Speaker
The hon. Gentleman has asked leave to move the Adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing 1049 a specific and important matter which he thinks should have urgent consideration, namely, the necessity of the Government to make an immediate statement in respect of financial concessions to those charged levy under the Land Commission Act. As the House knows, under the revised Standing Order No. 9 Mr. Speaker is expressly directed to take into account the several factors set out in that revised Standing Order, but to give no reasons for his decision.
I have given careful consideration to the representations that the hon. Gentleman has made, but I have to rule that his submission does not fall within the provisions of the revised Standing Order, and, therefore, I cannot submit his application to the House.