§ (1) Where property transferred consists of—
- (a) shares, loans, stocks or debentures in a company registered in the United Kingdom none of whose shares are quoted on any stock exchange, or
- (b) assets of a partnership carrying on business in the United Kingdom, or
- (c) assets of a trade, vocation in profession wholly owned by the transferor and situate in the United Kingdom,
§ (2) Paragraph 1 above shall only apply where the property received by the transferee consists of at least one-tenth of the shares of the company, or one-tenth of the assets of the partnership, and where the transferor has owned the property transferred for a minimum of five years prior to the date of transfer.'—[Mr. David Howell.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.
§ Mr. David Howell
I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time.
The purpose of the new clause is clear. It is to prevent the break-up of small businesses and family firms up and down the land. By the courtesy and generosity of the Government we have been left 22 minutes in which to discuss this issue and 1658 the tens of thousands of jobs that are involved in it. It is disgraceful. There used to be a courtesy of this House that when the Government imposed a guillotine, Government back benchers, out of courtesy and understanding, would hold back in their verbosity. Like many other aspects of good manners, however, that is one thing which has been thrown over by the present Government, and it is no surprise to us.
Throughout the debate so far the Chief Secretary has maintained that the lower lifetime rates that were introduced on a piece of rather scruffy photo-copied paper in Committee upstairs as a so-called concession would help small business. First, if they help anybody—obviously, lower rates make the reprieve or stay of execution to some extent valid—they apply not only to small business but to everybody in the ranges concerned up to £250,000.
We say that this concession is no concession and that small firms will still be strangled. We are not the only people who say it. Not only the Opposition parties in this House say that. Throughout the country every Member has had the same experience. Letters have come, and hon. Members have been inundated with correspondence from firms all over the country who will be damaged and from jobs all over the country that will be lost.
1659 Every time the Chief Secretary says that only a few people will be affected, I know he does not really believe that. He well knows that it will be many thousands of jobs, but he is obliged to say that particularly on the Floor of the House in front of his critical hon. Friends behind him who believe that this is the case and want to hear him say that. But it is not true. Thousands of jobs are affected. A motion was moved this afternoon under the Standing Order No. 9 procedure drawing the attention of the House to the loss of jobs in the textile industry. This is the way to lose jobs in the textile industry. This is the way to make sure that in a few years firm after firm in wool, textiles and knitting will close down, or be taken over by a large corporation with distant headquarters which will not have the slightest interest in the firm.
The same goes for printing, removals and the unquoted sector of shipping which will be damaged beyond repair and sold abroad. The same goes for light engineering and the building industry.
There are 6 million workpeople in the country who will be affected before long as the boss gets to retiring age and the time comes to consider what to do about the firm. With this tax, even at the lifetime rates, there will be only two choices. One is to sell up and the other is to sell out to a larger firm. That is the possibility, and it brings the shadow of redundancy into every firm of a size which will be affected by the capital transfer tax, and that is every size except the smallest.
Throughout the debate the Chancellor has gone to great lengths, with the Chief Secretary trotting behind him, through statistical variations, at which he is extremely good, to prove that the rates are very low—lower than estate duty. He even wrote an article in the Daily Express—which we looked at in Committee—in which he said that on a £50,000 garage the rate would be only £3,875. But he forgot a few things. He forgot capital gains tax which, as the table published in the Official Report showed, could put the tax up to £28,988. He conveniently forgot to mention that if the tax was paid in instalments by the donor, unless it came out of the £1,000 exempt transfer—which was so derided by the Chancellor 1660 earlier today as being something which only Opposition Members knew about—it would not be £3,875 but £4,697. He forgot to mention that those figures applied only if there were no previous gifts. He forgot all the conditions and all the qualities that make the tax not lower but far higher than estate duty.
Government supporters may say that a firm worth £350,000 is enormous, but it is not a very big firm. They will know many working people in family firms of about that size. The tax that has to be paid to pass that firm on is £361,000—over 100 per cent. That is another way of saying that the firm must be brought to an end and those jobs must be brought to an end, and that is what will happen to tens of thousands of workpeople. If we cannot get that into the heads of Labour Members, we shall have failed to bring home to them that throughout the country they will damage thousands of small firms in the independent sector in all kinds of industry in many of the constituencies they represent.
Not the Chief Secretary, but many hon. Members behind him are against the independent sector. They want the National Enterprise Board to take it over. We are not. We are against big units, big corporations and big bureaucracy. That is why, throughout, we shall defend the independent sector and the small firms against the tax which is being imposed upon them and which will destroy them if it goes through.
§ 11.45 p.m.
§ Dr. Gilbert
It is, of course, permissible for the hon. Member for Guildford (Mr. Howell) at this time of night to engage in a little generous hyperbole. On this occasion he has exceeded himself. I do not doubt that his postbag has been full of letters from firms throughout the country worried about the effects of this tax. I am not at all surprised, bearing in mind the sort of remarks he and his hon. Friends have been making over the past few weeks. There has been such a campaign of misrepresentation about this tax that it is virtually unrecognisable.
§ Mr. David Mitchell (Basingstoke)
When the hon. Gentleman says that there has been a campaign of misrepresentation is he referring to the article in the Daily Express by the Chancellor?
§ Dr. Gilbert
I am not sure what the effect of that intervention was meant to be. The hon. Member for Guildford and his hon. Friends have conjured up images of Arab-laden Cadillacs cruising around the industrial areas of the country, looking for small firms to swallow up. I have not seen any in my part of the country and I have not heard of them from any of my hon. Friends.
We have heard that this tax will mean the destruction of small firms when the hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that the rates of duty, even allowing for the withdrawal of the 45 per cent. relief, are lower than they were under estate duty. He has continuously tried to misrepresent the effect of grossing-up and has totally ignored the comparative rates for estate duty and capital transfer tax.
§ Sir John Hall (Wycombe)
Does the hon. Gentleman agree that, from figures given in Hansard recently, the operation of the capital transfer tax will mean that when the family of a man who has built up a business over several years, becomes liable to tax that tax will be in excess of the total value of the business?
§ Dr. Gilbert
I am coming to the capital gains tax. Tory Members have continuously misrepresented this proposal. The hon. Member for Guildford does not seem to understand the Bill—I impute no malice. He misrepresents the effect of grossing-up. He talks of a rate of over 100 per cent. When he talks of a grossed-up rate he knows that that is equivalent to 50 per cent. of a net transfer. He knows that a net rate of 50 per cent. comes in at a higher level under capital transfer tax than it ever did under estate duty. The rates are considerably lower and he knows it. If he does not know it he has not read the Bill or he is not familiar with estate duty provisions.
Conservative Members have told us that under the tax régime of this country it is impossible for a business to generate savings and for people to build up fortunes in their lifetime. If that is so, and I do not believe it, we are talking about the transmission of fortunes that have been inherited and not accumulated through savings or earnings. I take it from the silence of Tory Members that they take that point. I will be happy to give way if any hon. Gentleman wishes to intervene.
§ Mr. Hordern
The hon. Gentleman has forgotten to take into account the effect of capital gains tax. Will he give an undertaking that capital gains tax will not apply to death at any stage in our considerations?
§ Dr. Gilbert
Of course I will not give any such undertaking. One of the complaints hon. Gentlemen have been making is that the tax will lock entrepreneurs into a situation where they will not want to hand on their businesses during their life. They say that it is a disincentive to lifetime transfers. That is a serious criticism. Probably the most enormous disincentive to lifetime transfers is that capital gains tax is at present not chargeable on death. They will be glad to know that we propose to remove that disincentive to lifetime transfers by reimposing the capital gains tax charge on death, as we have indicated all along we would do.
We do not suggest that the capital gains tax in its present condition is a perfect tax. I have made no secret of my view on the tax, nor have my right hon. Friends in the Treasury. But the capital gains tax has been in situ for many years and the Conservatives have done nothing whatever to remedy the defects which they now claim to see in it. It is a most preposterous suggestion.
I will do the House the justice of examining new Clause 20—which was more than was done by the hon. Member for Guildford in moving the provision. The clause, which ostensibly seeks to relieve transfers involving small businesses, exempts from tax transfers of certain classes of asset until such time as the transferee sells the assets. The assets in question are shares in an unquoted company, assets of United Kingdom partnerships, and assets of a United Kingdom trade or profession wholly owned by the transferor. There is no condition in the clause to suggest that the amounts involved should be restricted in any way. Massive amounts of capital could be involved in the transfers for which relief is contemplated in new Clause 20. Some large companies are unquoted. Furthermore, the assets of some partnerships are large.
Representations were made to us about relief which my right hon. Friend introduced for stock appreciation in the Bill. 1663 He was asked about stock in a partnership amounting to £1¼ million. It was put to him that this was a deserving case for relief and he was asked why we could not make relief available this year. My right hon. Friend said that he was unable to give relief this year. A huge amount of assets in a partnership could be let through the loophole provided by the clause.
The purpose of the clause is to place owners of certain types of assets in a privileged position—a situation which we believe to be intolerable. It would also cause serious economic distortions and lead the transferee to feel locked into assets which he had acquired, when it might be in his and in the nation's interest to sell them.
My right hon. Friend the Chief Secretary has made clear the reliefs which we have made available to small businesses. The lifetime scale provides for a substantial reduction at the lowest level in the effective rate of tax and a reduction of about one-third at a level of £250,000. These rates are lower than the rates on death which are themselves lower than the rates for estate duty.
We are told that we are not sufficiently considering the needs of small business. That is a preposterous charge and I invite my right hon. Friends to reject it with the contempt which it deserves.
§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
The speech made by the Financial Secretary was a disgrace to the merits of the argument. It is impossible to discover how the Government expect any small business to survive the imposition of a tax on this scale.
We are not concerned only with the private possessions of those who run these businesses—those who own them; we are concerned with the fact that these businesses provide jobs and occupations for many people throughout the country. What is more, they represent the seed corn of the future or the growth points from which future companies are likely to develop. The prosperity of Britain depends on their continued capacity to exist. How in Heaven's name can such companies possibly survive the rates of tax which the Government propose to introduce? The Financial Secretary has 1664 never provided an answer to that question.
I take the example of a business worth £100,000 which has been running for a generation but which is not now growing in real value. It is now only keeping pace with inflation at a rate of 10 per cent. in money terms. We were told in a Written Answer that a business worth £100,000 would pay a combined capital gains tax and capital transfer tax of £105,000, which is more than 100 per cent. That is not taxation. It is not confiscation. It is wanton destruction.
This provision is founded upon a total misconception, which dominates the minds of Government supporters, that proprietors of small businesses are sitting upon spare cash and resources which they can spend on sweets and their own comfort and which they are free to raise and to pay to the Exchequer when their businesses change hands. That is a total misconception. The reason is that the Government are determined to destroy small businesses without any justification.
§ Sir Geoffrey Howe
My hon. Friend is right. There is a fundamental misconception in the mind of the Government.
How will the legatees preserve the business and raise enough money to pay the tax? The Chief Secretary suggested that they could do so by dividing the business up between the husband and wife. On another occasion the Financial Secretary said that they could do so by giving away £1,000 slices, using salami tactics. I dare say, they could do that if they sought the advice of the right hon. Gentleman. However, as soon as they did so they would be denounced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer for tax avoidance and for seeking to find loopholes in this monstrously absurd tax.
If those people are driven to selling those businesses, or parts of them, there will be nobody able to buy them, apart perhaps from Lord Kearton, the Arabs, Sir Don Ryder or Lord Stansgate, which is the other name of the Secretary of State for Industry. This is a prescription for domination by the State and for the destruction of small businesses.
1665 The Government deserve to be indicted on all counts, and I invite my hon. Friends to reject the Government's proposals as enthusiastically as possible.
§ Mr. A. G. F. Hall-Davis (Morecambe and Lonsdale)
This talk of businesses being sold when the proprietor reaches retirement is untrue. Those businesses will be closed in the immediate future as a result of this legislation.
§ of a small company. I am the part owner of a company which in February exported £104,000-worth of door handles. Government supporters may think it amusing but it will not be worth while for that firm to export door handles of that value in future.
§ Question put, That the Clause be read a Second time:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 262, Noes 277.1669
|Division No. 129.]||AYES||[12 midnight|
|Adley, Robert||Fletcher, Alex (Edinburgh N)||Lane, David|
|Aitken, Jonathan||Fletcher-Cooke, Charles||Langford-Holt, Sir John|
|Alison, Michael||Fookes, Miss Janet||Latham, Michael (Melton)|
|Atkins, Rt Hon H. (Spelthorne)||Fowler, Norman (Sutton C'f'd)||Lawrence, Ivan|
|Awdry, Daniel||Fox, Marcus||Lawson, Nigel|
|Bain, Mrs Margaret||Fraser, Rt Hon H. (Stafford & St)||Le Marchant, Spencer|
|Banks, Robert||Freud, Clement||Lester, Jim (Beeston)|
|Beith, A. J.||Fry, Peter||Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland)|
|Bell, Ronald||Galbraith, Hon. T. G. D.||Lloyd, Ian|
|Bennett, Dr Reginald (Fareham)||Galpern, Sir Myer||Loveridge, John|
|Benyon, W.||Gardiner, George (Reigate)||Luce, Richard|
|Berry, Hon Anthony||Gilmour, Rt Hon Ian (Chesham)||MacCormick, Iain|
|Biffen, John||Gilmour, Sir John (East Fife)||McCrindle, Robert|
|Blaker, Peter||Glyn, Dr Alan||McCusker, H.|
|Bowden, A. (Brighton, Kemptown)||Goodhart, Philip||Macfarlane, Neil|
|Boyson, Dr. Rhodes (Brent)||Goodlad, Alastair||MacGregor, John|
|Bradford, Rev Robert||Gorst, John||Macmillan, Rt Hon M. (Farnham)|
|Brittan, Leon||Gow, Ian (Eastbourne)||McNair-Wilson, M. (Newbury)|
|Brotherton, Michael||Grant, Anthony (Harrow C)||McNair-Wilson, P. (New Forest)|
|Brown, Sir Edward (Bath)||Gray, Hamish||Marshall, Michael (Arundel)|
|Bryan, Sir Paul||Griffiths, Eldon||Marten, Neil|
|Buchanan-Smith, Alick||Grylls, Michael||Mates, Michael|
|Buck, Antony||Hall, Sir John||Mather, Carol|
|Budgen, Nick||Hall-Davis, A. G. F.||Maudling, Rt Hon Reginald|
|Bulmer, Esmond||Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury)||Mawby, Ray|
|Burden, F. A.||Hampson, Dr Keith||Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin|
|Carlisle, Mark||Hannam, John||Mayhew, Patrick|
|Carson, John||Harrison, Col Sir Harwood (Eye)||Meyer, Sir Anthony|
|Chalker, Mrs Lynda||Hastings, Stephen||Miller, Hal (Bromsgrove)|
|Churchill, W. S.||Havers, Sir Michael||Miscampbell, Norman|
|Clark, Alan (Plymouth, Sutton)||Hawkins, Paul||Mitchell, David (Basingstoke)|
|Clark, William (Croydon S)||Hayhoe, Barney||Moate, Roger|
|Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe)||Henderson, Douglas||Molyneaux, James|
|Clegg, Walter||Heseltine, Michael||Monro, Hector|
|Cockcroft, John||Higgins, Terence L.||Montgomery, Fergus|
|Cooke, Robert (Bristol W)||Holland, Philip||Moore, John (Croydon C)|
|Cope, John||Hooson, Emlyn||More, Jasper (Ludlow)|
|Cormack, Patrick||Hordern, Peter||Morgan-Giles, Rear-Admiral|
|Corrie, John||Howe, Rt Hn Sir Geoffrey||Morrison, Charles (Devizes)|
|Costain, A. P.||Howell, David (Guildford)||Morrison, Hon Peter (Chester)|
|Craig, Rt Hon W. (Belfast E)||Howell, Ralph (North Norfolk)||Mudd, David|
|Crawford, Douglas||Howells, Geraint (Cardigan)||Neave, Airey|
|Crouch, David||Hunt, John||Nelson, Anthony|
|Crowder, F. P.||Hurd, Douglas||Neubert, Michael|
|Davies, Rt Hon J. (Knutsford)||Irving, Charles (Cheltenham)||Newton, Tony|
|Dodsworth, Geoffrey||James, David||Normanton, Tom|
|Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James||Jenkin, Rt Hon P. (Wanst'd & W'df'd)||Nott, John|
|du Cann, Rt Hon Edward||Jessel, Toby||Onslow, Cranley|
|Durant, Tony||Johnson Smith, G. (E. Grinstead)||Oppenheim, Mrs Sally|
|Dykes, Hugh||Johnston, Russell (Inverness)||Osborn, John|
|Eden, Rt Hon Sir John||Jones, Arthur (Daventry)||Page, John (Harrow West)|
|Edwards, Nicholas (Pembroke)||Jopling, Michael||Page, Rt Hon R. Graham (Crosby)|
|Elliott, Sir William||Joseph, Rt Hon Sir Keith||Paisley, Rev. Ian|
|Emery, Peter||Kaberry, Sir Donald||Pardoe, John|
|Evans, Gwynfor (Carmarthen)||Kellett-Bowman, Mrs Elaine||Parkinson, Cecil|
|Ewing, Mrs Winifred (Moray)||Kilfedder, James||Pattie, Geoffrey|
|Eyre, Reginald||Kimball, Marcus||Penhaligon, David|
|Fairbairn, Nicholas||King, Evelyn (South Dorset)||Percival, Ian|
|Fairgrieve, Russell||King, Tom (Bridgwater)||Peyton, Rt Hon John|
|Farr, John||Kirk, Peter||Pink, R. Bonner|
|Fell, Anthony||Kitson, Sir Timothy||Powell, Rt Hon J. Enoch|
|Finsberg, Geoffrey||Knight, Mrs Jill||Pym, Rt Hon Francis|
|Fisher, Sir Nigel||Lamont, Norman||Raison, Timothy|
|Rawlinson, Rt Hon Sir Peter||Sims, Roger||Trotter, Neville|
|Rees, Peter (Dover & Deal)||Sinclair, Sir George||Tugendhat, Christopher|
|Rees-Davies, W. R.||Skeet, T. H. H.||van Straubenzee, W. R.|
|Reid, George||Smith, Dudley (Warwick)||Vaughan, Dr. Gerard|
|Renton, Rt Hon Sir D. (Hunts)||Speed, Keith||Viggers, Peter|
|Renton, Tim (Mid-Sussex)||Spence, John||Wainwright, Richard (Colne V)|
|Rhys Williams, Sir Brandon||Spicer, Jim (W Dorset)||Wakeham, John|
|Ridley, Hon Nicholas||Spicer, Michael (S Worcester)||Walters, Dennis|
|Ridsdale, Julian||Sproat, Iain||Warren, Kenneth|
|Rifkind, Malcolm||Stainton, Keith||Watt, Hamish|
|Rippon, Rt Hon Geoffrey||Stanbrook, Ivor||Weatherill, Bernard|
|Roberts, Michael (Cardiff NW)||Stanley, John||Wells, John|
|Roberts, Wyn (Conway)||Steel, David (Roxburgh)||Welsh, Andrew|
|Ross, Stephen (Isle of Wight)||Steen, Anthony (Wavertree)||Whitelaw, Rt Hon William|
|Ross, William (Londonderry)||Stewart, Ian (Hitchin)||Wiggin, Jerry|
|Rossi, Hugh (Hornsey)||Stokes, John||Wigley, Dafydd|
|Rost, Peter (SE Derbyshire)||Stradling Thomas, J.||Wilson, Gordon (Dundee E)|
|Royle, Sir Anthony||Tapsell, Peter||Winterton, Nicholas|
|Sainsbury, Tim||Taylor, Teddy (Cathcart)||Wood, Rt Hon Richard|
|St. John-Stevas, Norman||Tebbit, Norman||Young, Sir G. (Ealing, Acton)|
|Scott, Nicholas||Temple-Morris, Peter||Younger, Hon George|
|Scott-Hopkins, James||Thatcher, Rt Hon Margaret|
|Shaw, Giles (Pudsey)||Thomas, Dafydd (Merioneth)||TELLERS FOR THE AYES:|
|Shaw, Michael (Scarborough)||Thompson, George||Mr. Adam Butler and|
|Shepherd, Colin||Thorpe, Rt Hon Jeremy (N Devon)||Mr. Fred Silvester.|
|Shersby, Michael||Townsend, Cyril D.|
|Abse, Leo||Davis, Clinton (Hackney C)||Huckfield, Les|
|Allaun, Frank||Deakins, Eric||Hughes, Rt Hon C. (Anglesey)|
|Anderson, Donald||Dean, Joseph (Leeds West)||Hughes, Mark (Durham)|
|Archer, Peter||de Freitas, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey||Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen N)|
|Armstrong, Ernest||Dempsey, James||Hughes, Roy (Newport)|
|Ashton, Joe||Doig, Peter||Hunter, Adam|
|Atkinson, Norman||Dormand, J. D.||Irving, Rt Hon S. (Dartford)|
|Bagier, Gordon A. T.||Douglas-Mann, Bruce||Jackson, Colin (Brighouse)|
|Barnett, Guy (Greenwich)||Duffy, A. E. P.||Jackson, Miss Margaret (Lincoln)|
|Barnett, Rt Hon Joel (Heywood)||Dunn, James A.||Janner, Greville|
|Bates, Alf||Dunnett, Jack||Jay, Rt Hon Douglas|
|Bean, R. E.||Dunwoody, Mrs Gwyneth||Jeger, Mrs Lena|
|Benn, Rt Hon Anthony Wedgwood||Eadie, Alex||Jenkins, Hugh (Putney)|
|Bennett, Andrew (Stockport N)||Edelman, Maurice||Jenkins, Rt Hon Roy (Stechford)|
|Bidwell, Sydney||Edge, Geoff||John, Brynmor|
|Blenkinsop, Arthur||Ellis, Tom (Wrexham)||Johnson, James (Hull West)|
|Boardman, H.||English, Michael||Johnson, Walter (Derby S)|
|Booth, Albert||Evans, Ioan (Aberdare)||Jones, Alec (Rhondda)|
|Boothroyd, Miss Betty||Evans, John (Newton)||Jones, Barry (East Flint)|
|Bottomley, Rt Hon Arthur||Ewing, Harry (Stirling)||Jones, Dan (Burnley)|
|Bradley, Tom||Fernyhough, Rt Hon E.||Judd, Frank|
|Bray, Dr Jeremy||Fitt, Gerard (Belfast W)||Kaufman, Gerald|
|Brown, Hugh D. (Provan)||Flannery, Martin||Kelley, Richard|
|Brown, Robert C. (Newcastle W)||Fletcher, Ted (Darlington)||Kerr, Russell|
|Brown, Ronald (Hackney S)||Foot, Rt Hon Michael||Kilroy-Silk, Robert|
|Buchan, Norman||Ford, Ben||Kinnock, Neil|
|Butler, Mrs Joyce (Wood Green)||Forrester, John||Lambie, David|
|Callaghan, Jim (Middleton & P)||Fowler, Gerald (The Wrekin)||Lamborn, Harry|
|Campbell, Ian||Fraser, John (Lambeth, N'w'd)||Lamond, James|
|Canavan, Dennis||Freeson, Reginald||Latham, Arthur (Paddington)|
|Cant, R. B.||Garrett, John (Norwich S)||Leadbitter, Ted|
|Carmichael, Neil||Garrett, W. E. (Wallsend)||Lee, John|
|Carter, Ray||Gilbert, Dr John||Lever, Rt Hon Harold|
|Carter-Jones, Lewis||Ginsburg, David||Lewis, Ron (Carlisle)|
|Castle, Rt Hon Barbara||Golding, John||Lipton, Marcus|
|Clemitson, Ivor||Gould, Bryan||Lomas, Kenneth|
|Cocks, Michael (Bristol S)||Gourlay, Harry||Loyden, Eddie|
|Cohen, Stanley||Graham, Ted||Luard, Evan|
|Coleman, Donald||Grant, John (Islington C)||Lyon, Alexander (York)|
|Colquhoun, Mrs Maureen||Grocott, Bruce||Lyons, Edward (Bradford W)|
|Concannon, J. D.||Hamilton, James (Bothwell)||McCartney, Hugh|
|Conlan, Bernard||Hamilton W. W. (Central Fife)||MacFarquhar, Roderick|
|Cook, Robin F. (Edin C)||Hamling, William||McGuire, Michael (Ince)|
|Corbett, Robin||Hardy, Peter||Mackenzie, Gregor|
|Cox, Thomas (Tooting)||Harrison, Walter (Wakefield)||Mackintosh, John P.|
|Craigen, J. M. (Maryhill)||Hart, Rt Hon Judith||Maclennan, Robert|
|Cronin, John||Hattersley, Rt Hon Roy||McMillan, Tom (Glasgow C)|
|Crosland, Rt Hon Anthony||Hatton, Frank||McNamara, Kevin|
|Cryer, Bob||Hayman, Mrs Helene||Madden, Max|
|Cunningham, G. (Islington S)||Healey, Rt Hon Denis||Magee, Bryan|
|Dalyell, Tam||Heffer, Eric S.||Mahon, Simon|
|Davidson, Arthur||Hooley, Frank||Marks, Kenneth|
|Davies, Bryan (Enfield N)||Horam, John||Marquand, David|
|Davies, Denzil (Llanelli)||Howell, Denis (B'ham, Sm H)||Marshall, Dr Edmund (Goole)|
|Davies, Ifor (Gower)||Hoyle, Doug (Nelson)||Marshall, Jim (Leicester S)|
|Mason, Rt Hon Roy||Rees, Rt Hon Merlyn (Leeds S)||Taylor, Mrs Ann (Bolton W)|
|Meacher, Michael||Richardson, Miss Jo||Thomas, Jeffrey (Abertillery)|
|Mellish, Rt Hon Robert||Roberts, Albert (Normanton)||Thomas, Mike (Newcastle E)|
|Mikardo, Ian||Roberts, Gwilym (Cannock)||Thomas, Ron (Bristol NW)|
|Millan, Bruce||Robertson, John (Paisley)||Thorne, Stan (Preston South)|
|Miller, Dr M. S. (E Kilbride)||Roderick, Caerwyn||Tierney, Sydney|
|Miller, Mrs Millie (Ilford N)||Rodgers, George (Chorley)||Tinn, James|
|Mitchell, R. C. (Soton, Itchen)||Rodgers, William (Stockton)||Tomlinson, John|
|Molloy, William||Rooker, J. W.||Torney, Tom|
|Moonman, Eric||Roper, John||Urwin, T. W.|
|Morris, Alfred (Wythenshawe)||Rose, Paul B.||Varley, Rt Hon Eric G.|
|Morris, Charles R. (Openshaw)||Ross, Rt Hon W. (Kilmarnock)||Wainwright, Edwin (Dearne V)|
|Mulley, Rt Hon Frederick||Rowlands, Ted||Walden, Brian (B'ham, L'dyw'd)|
|Murray, Rt Hon Ronald King||Ryman, John||Walker, Harold (Doncaster)|
|Newens, Stanley||Sandelson, Neville||Walker, Terry (Kingswood)|
|Noble, Mike||Sedgemore, Brian||Ward, Michael|
|Oakes, Gordon||Selby, Harry||Watkins, David|
|Ogden, Eric||Shaw, Arnold (Ilford South)||Watkinson, John|
|O'Halloran, Michael||Sheldon, Robert (Ashton-u-Lyne)||Weitzman, David|
|O'Malley, Rt Hon Brian||Shore, Rt Hon Peter||Wellbeloved, James|
|Orbach, Maurice||Short, Rt Hon E. (Newcastle C)||White, Frank R. (Bury)|
|Orme, Rt Hon Stanley||Short, Mrs Renée (Wolv NE)||White, James (Pollok)|
|Ovenden, John||Silkin, Rt Hon John (Deptford)||Whitehead, Phillip|
|Owen, Dr David||Silkin, Rt Hon S. C. (Dulwich)||Whitlock, William|
|Padley, Walter||Sillars, James||Willey, Rt Hon Frederick|
|Palmer, Arthur||Silverman, Julius||Williams, Alan (Swansea W)|
|Park, George||Skinner, Dennis||Williams, W. T. (Warrington)|
|Parker, John||Small, William||Wilson, Alexander (Hamilton)|
|Parry, Robert||Smith, John (N Lanarkshire)||Wilson, Rt Hon H. (Huyton)|
|Pavitt, Laurie||Snape, Peter||Wilson, William (Coventry SE)|
|Peart, Rt Hon Fred||Spearing, Nigel||Wise, Mrs Audrey|
|Pendry, Tom||Spriggs, Leslie||Woodall, Alec|
|Perry, Ernest||Stallard, A. W.||Wrigglesworth, Ian|
|Phipps, Dr Colin||Stewart, Rt Hon M. (Fulham)||Young, David (Bolton E)|
|Prentice, Rt Hon Reg||Stoddart, David|
|Prescott, John||Stott, Roger||TELLERS FOR THE NOES:|
|Price, C. (Lewisham W)||Strang, Gavin||Mr. Joseph Harper and|
|Price, William (Rugby)||Strauss, Rt Hon G. R.||Mr. John Ellis.|
|Radice, Giles||Summerskill, Hon Dr Shirley|
§ Question accordingly negatived.
§ It being after Twelve o'clock, further consideration of the Bill, as amended stood adjourned.
§ Bill, as amended, to be further considered this day.