HC Deb 15 July 1980 vol 988 cc1441-52

Amendment made: No. 288, in the title, line 18, after 'council', insert 'to empower certain further authorities to confer honorary distinctions'[Mr. Nelson.]

Motion made, and Question proposed, That the Bill be now read the Third time.

12.1 am

Mr. Rippon

The Bill has such far-reaching consequences that it would be wrong to give it a formal Third Reading. Much remains to be said about it, but I assure the House that I shall not say it all tonight. However, as an anti-wet, Right-wing, radical Conservative I do not like conglomerate measures such as this. I pay tribute to the courtesy and skill with which my right hon. Friend and his colleagues have piloted the Bill to this stage.

It is dangerous to discuss measures of such complexity in a casual way. I do not often agree with the right hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Foot), but I have always shared his anxieties about the way in which we conduct our business. Myriads of Committees occupy much time. Hon. Members scurry from room to room doing, no doubt, excellent work, but we must always remember that the ultimate power and responsibility rests in this Chamber. The Bill is at the stage at which we might be grateful that the other place can put it into some order.

The Opposition have been less than full-hearted in their opposition to the Bill. Their opposition to the Housing Bill was different. There could be two reasons for their attitude. First, when in opposition there are good arguments for not improving a Bill because the better it is the less trouble the Government will be in. Secondly, they might be looking forward to using some of the powers if they have the chance.

I am grateful for what was said about the powers of urban development corporations. The undertaking that was given this afternoon should meet most of the objections that I have made and will make it impossible for any future Secretary of State to absorb all the functions of the City of London, which is possible under the Bill as it stands.

The trouble is that this conglomerate measure contains several distinct Bills, parts of which I approve, and parts of which I do not. I do not like the financial provisions. They are pernicious in theory and probably unworkable in practice. I have reservations about some of the planning provisions, which are muddled and strewn with pitfalls.

I welcome the concept of enterprise zones. It is clear that the provisions of schedule 25—I am glad to have had an undertaking about that—will have to be looked at closely in another place.

In the circumstances—I do not know whether it will come to a Division—I shall not be able to vote for the Bill on Third Reading, but because I approve of some parts, though not of others, I shall, whatever may happen in the next few minutes, confidently abstain from voting, knowing that, given the assurances that my right hon. Friends have offered today and on earlier occasions, the Bill will eventually emerge from the other place in better shape than it is today. That may be a hope, but I am sure that it is one that will be fulfilled.

12.5 am

Mr. Alton

I do not intend to detain the House for long, but I think that it would be unwise to pass the Bill at this stage without listening to the comments of people such as the right hon. and learned Member for Hexham (Mr. Rippon), who has had a wealth of experience as a previous Secretary of State for the Environment.

I remind the House of the speech made by the hon. Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Mr. Beaumont-Dark) during the discussion of the unitary grant system. He is a Conservative Member with great experience in local government, but he had nothing but disdain for the measures introduced by the Government on the unitary grant system.

While we on the Liberal Bench welcome parts of the Bill—in particular the measures concerned with the relaxation of central controls and the publication of information—we feel that in other areas, particularly the financial aspects of the Bill governing the unitary grant system and capital projects, the legislation leaves a great deal to be desired. We share the views of local authority associations, such as the Association of Metropolitan Authorities, the Association of District Councils and many of the Conservative-controlled councils all over the country, that the Government should think again before putting this Bill on to the statute book. I urge Conservative Members, even if they vote for the Bill, to urge their noble colleagues in another place to reconsider many of the provisions of the Bill.

I return in particular to the question of the unitary grant system and to the provisions governing capital expenditure. The financial provisions of the Bill will do more to undermine local government autonomy than anything else.

Hon. Members on the Opposition Benches have paid tribute to the concept of the urban development corporation and the enterprise zones. There is a grave danger that the UDCs and the enterprise zones will become like states within a state and begin to undermine local government by setting up new barriers. I remind the House of the folly that it committed in 1973 when it implemented the Conservative Government's proposals on the reform of local government. County councils that were established have proved to be unwieldy and have set up barriers between themselves and district councils all over the country. Those proposals were an act of folly because they were piecemeal legislation.

I am concerned also about the powers that the Bill confers on the Secretary of State for the Environment. However, I must pay tribute to the Minister of State for the way in which he has handled the passage of the Bill. I am grateful to him for the courtesy that he extended to me and my colleagues during our contributions, but I am anxious about the attitude of his right hon. Friend in his dealings with local authorities. He had to apologise in the House to the Association of Metropolitan Authorities when he first brought forward the proposals in the Bill, which he never even had the courtesy to discuss with that organisation.

It is for those reasons that I suspect the motives of the Secretary of State when I say that I believe that he is deliberately trying to undermine local government and attempting to take greater powers for himself. For that reason I urge hon. Members to vote against the Third Reading.

12.9 am

Mr. Cant

I shall be brief. As the oldest member of those who served on the Committee, and as one who still serves in local government, I should like to make one or two comments. I join the right hon. and learned Member for Hexham (Mr. Rippon) and the hon. Member for Liverpool, Edge Hill (Mr. Alton) in paying tribute to the Minister of State. Everybody felt not only that he conducted the affairs of the Committee with his usual courtesy and competence but that he managed to diffuse the proceedings in a way that sometimes made us wonder whether we were truly fulfilling our task of bashing the Government in the same way as was done in the Housing Bill and Social Security Bill Committees. Perhaps it was his approach and his obvious gift of being able to pour oil on troubled waters from time to time that did it, but it was also partly the nature of the subject. Whatever has been said about the Minister's colleague, I established quite a decent rapport with the right hon. Gentleman and found him quite helpful. Of course, the right hon. Gentleman has a different style.

Having said that, I want to say in two sentences what I believe about the Bill. I think that it is yet another great and disastrous watershed in the history of local government. The first, as the hon. Member for Edge Hill mentioned, was in 1974, which organised local government so as to make it far more expensive and almost unworkable.

Mr. Arthur Lewis (Newham, North-West)

On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. Can you explain where in the Bill there is any reference to the Local Government Act 1974, which I agree the Tory Government were responsible for introducing? I understood that on Third Reading one discussed only what was in the Bill, not what one would like to see in it, or whether the person in charge was a good or bad Minister of State.

Mr. Deputy Speaker

It has been a long day, and perhaps it is now time for a few compliments to flow.

Mr. Cant

I could have finished my speech by now, Mr. Deputy Speaker. The first part of the Bill will result in the almost total destruction of direct labour organisation. The disclosure by authorities will give immense powers to the Secretary of State. The Bill proposes the introduction of the new block grant, yet even now, at this late hour, local authority officials do not know precisely how it will work. It also deals with capital expenditure and planning, as well as with the new UDCs.

The Bill introduces into local government, in a way that we cannot fully comprehend at present, a new anti-democratic bias which we shall all live to regret. Perhaps Tory Members are not very sensitive about these delicate issues. Those of us who have been involved in local government will, I am sure, see the build-up of a reaction within the communities which we try to serve which will be comparable to what we saw with the reform of 1974, which so far as I know is a reform without a friend.

12.13 am
Mr. King

I should like to reply briefly to the debate. I thank the three hon. Members for the kind personal comments that they made about myself and about my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary, to whom I am extremely grateful for the work that he has done in piloting the Bill through the House. I thought that it was a pretty mixed compliment, because they told me how much they had been won over by my charms, while advising me that they would all vote against the Bill.

I recognise that major issues are involved. It has been said by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Hexham (Mr. Rippon) and others that a number of Bills are contained within it. I do not accept that, but it covers an area of departmental responsibilities that are of considerable significance.

I take some pride in the fact that in the Bill we are repealing the Community Land Act, and also that we are repealing no fewer than 300 controls that Whitehall exercises over local government. We are making certain minor but beneficial improvements in the rating system to help the disabled and charities, which I am sure the whole House welcomes. We are introducing proposals with regard to land registers, which are generally welcomed on both sides of the House. We are introducing new arrangements with regard to the publication of information by local authorities, which I believe are also generally welcomed.

We are introducing new proposals, perhaps slightly more controversial, on direct labour organisations, which will be of great benefit to their economic operation. There are controversial proposals in our new arrangements for block grant, but at no time during our discussions has there been any defence of the present system. Everybody has recognised the need for change. We are not simply talking about it; we are taking action to make that change.

The Bill will make a major contribution to the relationship between central and local government in the area of local government, planning and land. The additional new innovations of urban development corporations and enterprise zones will be of significant benefit to some of the derelict and deprived parts of Britain and make their contribution towards the economic regeneration of this country. It is against that background that I warmly commend the Bill to the House.

Mr. Hattersley

Had the Minister confined himself to the blushing acceptance of the compliments, with which I wish to be associated, I should not have wished to delay the House by even three min utes. In defending the Bill, as he has done nobly for six months—a rule and a position that he does not share with the Secretary of State, who has brought himself to speak only once on the subject since the Bill was introduced in January—the Minister inevitably, and I suppose from his point of view properly, dealt with the more popular aspects of the Bill, and therefore the minor and less consequential aspects.

The right hon. Gentleman knows very well that the central issue on which we are asked to vote tonight on Third Reading contains the financial relationship between the Government and local authorities. He knows that that part of the Bill has very few friends indeed. We have not heard a single speech from the Conservative Back Benches in support of that part of the Bill. Not a single local authority association, including those controlled by the Conservative Party, is in favour of that part of the Bill. Every national newspaper that has written about that part of the Bill has condemned it, including those national newspapers that are normally sycophantic in their support and praise for the Government.

The truth is that the central issue in the Bill concerns not only the finances of local authorities, but the powers of the Secretary of State for the Environment. Within the Bill there are powers of the most arbitrary sort. They enable the Secretary of State to do what he likes, how he likes and when he likes about the distribution of central Government funds and the supervision of local authority activities. If the provisions within the Bill were acceptable to the Labour side of the House, the idea that a Bill containing such enabling powers should be passed, leaving an individual Minister with such discretion, would, in itself, be enough to take us into the "No" Lobby.

This sort of Bill should not be passed by a democratic House of Commons.

In addition, a major feature of the Bill—the only feature about which the Secretary of State has said anything outside the House—is the power to provide retrospective punishment to councils and councillors who behave properly and legally in April, but who, if the Bill is passed, will be punished for it in November. The true nature of the Bill—its arbitrary quality, its retrospective quality and the hybridity of its spirit—becomes clear. It is exactly the sort of Bill that people tell us the House of Lords is there to protect the people and the constitution against. I am sure that some of those—including myself—who are cynical about the willingness and the enthusiasm of the House of Lords to act on these occasions will look with great interest to see whether the other place does fulfil its traditional function and protect the people of Britain against an arbitrary, retrospective and hybrid Bill, or whether it allows the Bill to pass without the scrutiny, the changes, and the rejection that it deserves.

I suspect that the Bill will pass into law generally unamended, despite what may be said in another place. It will be left to the next Labour Government to remedy its ills. That remedy can be simply described. The main purpose of the Bill is to promote and extend central Government control over local government. We on the Labour side of the House reaffirm our belief in local government autonomy. When we are re-elected after the next election we shall restore the local government autonomy that the Bill removes.

Question put, That the Bill be now read the Third time:—

The House divided: Ayes 275, Noes 233.

Division No. 403] AYES [12.20 pm
Alexander, Richard Biggs-Davison, John Brotherton, Michael
Ancram, Michael Blackburn, John Brown, Michael (Brigg & Sc'thorpe)
Arnold, Tom Blaker, Peter Browne, John (Winchester)
Atkins, Rt Hon H. (Spelthorne) Body, Richard Bruce-Gardyne, John
Atkins, Robert (Preston North) Bonsor, Sir Nicholas Bryan, Sir Paul
Atkinson, David (B'mouth, East) Boscawen, Hon Robert Buck, Antony
Baker, Kenneth (St. Marylebone) Bottomley, Peter (Woolwich West) Budgen, Nick
Baker, Nicholas (North Dorset) Bowden, Andrew Bulmer, Esmond
Banks, Robert Boyson, Dr. Rhodes Burden, F. A.
Bennett, Sir Frederic (Torbay) Braine, Sir Bernard Butcher, John
Benyon, Thomas (Abingdon) Bright, Graham Butler, Hon Adam
Benyon, W. (Buckingham) Brinton, Tim Carlisle, John (Luton West)
Best, Keith Brittan, Leon Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln)
Bevan, David Gilroy Brocklebank-Fowler, Christopher Chalker, Mrs. Lynda
Biffen, Rt Hon John Brooke, Hon Peter Chapman, Sydney
Churchill, W. S. Hunt, David (Wirral) Porter, George
Clark, Hon Alan (Plymouth, Sutton) Hunt, John (Ravensbourne) Price, David (Eastleigh)
Clark, Sir William (Croydon South) Irving, Charles (Cheltenham) Prior, Rt Hon James
Clarke, Kenneth (Rushclifle) Jenkin, Rt Hon Patrick Proctor, K. Harvey
Clegg, Sir Walter Jessel, Toby Ralson, Timothy
Colvin, Michael Johnson Smith, Geoffrey Rathbone, Tim
Cope, John Jopling, Rt Hon Michael Rees-Davies, W. R.
Cormack, Patrick Joseph, Rt Hon Sir Keith Renton, Tim
Corrie, John Kershaw, Anthony Rhodes James, Robert
Costain, A. P. Kimball, Marcus Rhys Williams, Sir Brandon
Cranborne, Viscount King, Rt Hon Tom Ridley, Hon Nicholas
Critchley, Julian Kitson, Sir Timothy Ridsdale, Julian
Crouch, David Knight, Mrs Jill Rifkind, Malcolm
Dickens, Geoffrey Knox, David Roberts, Michael (Cardiff NW)
Dorrell, Stephen Lamont, Norman Roberts, Wyn (Conway)
Douglas-Hamilton, Lord James Lang, Ian Royle, Sir Anthony
Dover, Denshore Langford-Holt, Sir John Sainsbury, Hon Timothy
du Cann, Rt Hon Edward Latham, Michael St. John-Stevas, Rt Hon Norman
Dunn, Robert (Dartford) Lawrence, Ivan Scott, Nicholas
Durant, Tony Lawson, Nigel Shaw, Michael (Scarborough)
Eden, Rt Hon Sir John Lee, John Shelton, William (Streatham)
Edwards, Rt Hon N. (Pembroke) Lennox Boyd, Hon Mark Shepherd, Colin (Hereford)
Eggar, Timothy Lester, Jim (Beeston) Shepherd, Richard(Aldridge-Br'hills)
Elliott, Sir William Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland) Shersby, Michael
Emery, Peter Lloyd, Peter (Fareham) Silvester, Fred
Eyre, Reginald Loveridge, John Sims, Roger
Fairbairn, Nicholas Luce, Richard Speed, Keith
Faith, Mrs Sheila Lyell, Nicholas Spence, John
Farr, John Macfarlane, Neil Spicer, Jim (West Dorset)
Fenner, Mrs Peggy MacGregor, John Spicer, Michael (S Worcestershire)
Fisher, Sir Nigel MacKay, John (Argyll) Sproal, Iain
Fletcher, Alexander (Edinburgh N) McNair-Wilson, Michael (Newbury) Stainton, Keith
Fletcher-Cooke, Charles McNair-Wilson, Patrick (New Forest) Stanbrook, Ivor
Fookes, Miss Janet Major, John Stanley, John
Forman, Nigel Marland, Paul Steen, Anthony
Fowler, Rt Hon Norman Marshall, Michael (Arundel) Stevens, Martin
Fox, Marcus Marten, Neil (Banbury) Stewart, Ian (Hitchin)
Fraser, Rt Hon H. (Stafford & St) Mates, Michael Stewart, John (East Renfrewshire)
Fraser, Peter (South Angus) Mather, Carol Stokes, John
Fry, Peter Maude, Rt Hon Angus Stradling Thomas, J.
Galbraith, Hon T. G. D. Mawby, Ray Tapsell, Peter
Gardiner, George (Reigate) Mawhinney, Dr Brian Taylor, Robert (Croydon NW)
Gardner, Edward (South Fylde) Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin Taylor, Teddy (Southend East)
Garel-Jones, Tristan Mayhew, Patrick Tebbit, Norman
Gilmour, Rt Hon Sir Ian Meyer, Sir Anthony Temple-Morris, Peter
Ginsburg, David Mills, Iain (Meriden) Thomas, Rt Hon. Peter (Hendon S)
Glyn, Dr Alan Mills, Peter (West Devon) Thornton, Malcolm
Goodhart, Philip Miscampbell, Norman Townsend, Cyril D. (Bexleyheath)
Goodlad, Alastair Mitchell, David (Basingstoke) Trippier, David
Grant, Anthony (Harrow C) Moate, Roger Trotter, Neville
Gray, Hamish Monro, Hector van-Straubenzee, W. R.
Greenway, Harry Montgomery, Fergus Vaughan, Dr Gerard
Grieve, Percy Moore, John Viggers, Peter
Griffiths, Eldon (Bury St Edmunds) Morris, Michael (Northampton, Sth) Waddington, David
Griffiths, Peter (Portsmouth N) Morrison, Hon Charles (Devizes) Wakeham, John
Grist, Ian Morrison, Hon Peter (City of Chester) Waldegrave, Hon William
Grylls, Michael Mudd, David Walker, Bill (Perth & E Perthshire)
Gummer, John Selwyn Murphy, Christopher Wall, Patrick
Hamilton, Hon Archie (Eps'm&Ew'll, Myles, David Waller, Gary
Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury) Neale, Gerrard Walters, Dennis
Hampson, Dr Keith Needham, Richard Ward, John
Hannam, John Nelson, Anthony Warren, Kenneth
Haselhurst, Alan Neubert, Michael Wells, John (Maidstone)
Havers, Rt Hon Sir Michael Newton, Tony Wells, Bowen (Hert'rd & Stev'nage)
Hawkins, Paul Normanton, Tom Wheeler, John
Hawksley, Warren Nott, Rt Hon John Whitelaw, Rt Hon William
Hayhoe, Barney Onslow, Cranley Whitney, Raymond
Heddle, John Oppenheim, Rt Hon Mrs Sally Wickenden, Keith
Henderson, Barry Page, John (Harrow, West) Wiggin, Jerry
Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael Page, Rt Hon Sir R. Graham Wilkinson, John
Hicks, Robert Page, Richard (SW Hertfordshire) Williams, Delwyn (Montgomery)
Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L. Parkinson, Cecil Winterton, Nicholas
Hogg, Hon Douglas (Grantham) Parris, Matthew Wolfson, Mark
Holland, Philip (Carlton) Patten, Christopher (Bath) Young, Sir George (Acton)
Hooson, Tom Patten, John (Oxford)
Hordern, Peter Pattie, Geoffrey TELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Howell, Rt Hon David (Guildford) Pawsey, James Mr. Spencer Le Marchant and
Howell, Ralph (North Norfolk) Pink, R. Bonner Mr. Anthony Berry
Pollock, Alexander
Abse, Leo Alton, David Ashley, Rt Hon Jack
Adams, Allen Anderson, Donald Ashton, Joe
Allaun, Frank Archer, Rt Hon Peter Atkinson, Norman (H'gey, [...]ott'ham)
Bagier, Gordon A. T. Garrett, John (Norwich S) Newens, Stanley
Barnett, Guy (Greenwich) Garrett, W. E. (Wallsend) Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon
Barnett, Rt Hon Joel (Heywood) George, Bruce Ogden, Eric
Benn, Rt Hon Anthony Wedgwood Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr John O'Halloran, Michael
Bennett, Andrew (Stockport N) Ginsburg, David O'Neill, Martin
Bidwell, Sydney Graham, Ted Orme, Rt Hon Stanley
Booth, Rt Hon Albert Grant, George (Morpeth) Owen, Rt Hon Dr David
Boothroyd, Miss Betty Grant, John (Islington C) Parry, Robert
Bradley, Tom Hamilton, James (Bothwell) Pavitt, Laurie
Bray, Dr Jeremy Hamilton, W. W. (Central Fife) Pendry, Tom
Brown, Hugh D. (Provan) Hardy, Peter Penhaligon, David
Brown, Robert C. (Newcastle W) Harrison, Rt Hon Walter Powell, Raymond (Ogmore)
Brown, Ron (Edinburgh, Leith) Hattersley, Rt Hon Roy Prescott, John
Buchan, Norman Haynes, Frank Price, Christopher (Lewisham West)
Callaghan, Rt Hon J. (Cardiff SE) Healey, Rt Hon Denis Race, Reg
Campbell, Ian Heffer, Eric S. Radice, Giles
Campbell-Savours, Dale Hogg, Norman (E Dunbartonshire) Rees, Rt Hon Merlyn (Leeds South)
Canavan, Dennis Holland, Stuart (L'beth, Vauxhall) Richardson, Jo
Cant, R. B. Home Robertson, John Roberts, Albert (Normanton)
Carmichael, Neil Homewood, William Roberts, Allan (Bootle)
Carter-Jones, Lewis Hooley, Frank Roberts, Ernest (Hackney North)
Cartwright, John Horam, John Roberts, Gwilym (Cannock)
Clark, Dr. David (South Shields) Howell, Rt Hon Denis (B'ham, Sm H) Robertson, George
Cocks, Rt Hon Michael (Bristol S) Howells, Geraint Rodgers, Rt Hon William
Cohen, Stanley Huckfield, Les Rooker, J. W.
Coleman, Donald Hughes, Mark (Durham) Roper, John
Concannon Rt Hon J. D. Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen North) Ross, Ernest (Dundee West)
Conlan, Bernard Janner, Hon Greville Ross, Stephen (Isle of Wight)
Cook, Robin F. Jay, Rt Hon Douglas Rowlands, Ted
Cowans, Harry John, Brynmor Sever, John
Cox, Tom (Wandsworth, Tooting) Johnson, James (Hull West) Shearman, Barry
Crowther, J. S. Jones, Rt Hon Alec (Rhondda) Sheldon, Rt Hon Robert (A'ton-u-L)
Cryer, Bob Jones, Barry (East Flint) Shore, Rt Hon Peter (Step and Pop)
Cunliffe, Lawrence Jones, Dan (Burnley) Silkin, Rt Hon John (Deptford)
Cunningham, George (Islington S) Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald Silkin, Rt Hon S. C. (Dulwich)
Cunningham, Dr John (Whitehaven) Kerr, Russell Skinner, Dennis
Dalyell, Tam Kilroy-Silk, Robert Smith, Cyril (Rochdale)
Davidson, Arthur Kinnock, Neil Smith, Rt Hon J. (North Lanarkshire)
Davies, Rt Hon Denzil (Llanelli) Lambie, David Snape, Peter
Davies, Ifor (Gower) Lamond, James Soley, Clive
Davis, Clinton (Hackney Central) Lester, Miss Joan (Eton & Slough) Spearing, Nigel
Davis, Terry (B'rm'ham, Stechford) Lewis, Arthur (Newham North West) Spriggs, Leslie
Deakins, Eric Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) Stallard, A. W.
Dean, Joseph (Leeds West) Litherland, Robert Steel, Rt Hon David
Dempsey, James Lofthouse, Geoffrey Stoddart, David
Dewar, Donald Lyon, Alexander (York) Stott, Roger
Dixon, Donald Lyons, Edward (Bradford West) Strang, Gavin
Dobson, Frank McCartney, Hugh Straw, Jack
Dormand, Jack McDonald, Dr Oonagh Summerskill, Hon Dr Shirley
Douglas, Dick McElhone, Frank Taylor, Mrs Ann (Bolton West)
Douglas-Mann, Bruce McKay, Allen (Penistone) Thomas, Jeffrey (Abertillery)
Dubs, Alfred McKelvey, William Thomas, Mike (Newcastle East)
Duffy, A. E. P. MacKenzie, Rt Hon Gregor Thomas, Dr Roger (Carmarthen)
Dunlop, John Maclennan, Robert Thorne, Stan (Preston South)
Dunn, James A. (Liverpool, Kirkdale) McNally, Thomas Tilley, John
Dunnett, Jack McNamara, Kevin Torney, Tom
Dunwoody, Mrs Gwyneth McTaggart, Robert Urwin, Rt Hon Tom
Eadie, Alex McWilllam, John Varley, Rt Hon Eric G.
Eastham, Ken Magee, Bryan Wainwright, Richard (Colne Valley)
Ellis, Raymond (NE Derbyshire) Marshall, David (Gl'sgow, Shettles'n) Walker, Rt Hon Harold (Doncaster)
Ellis, Tom (Wrexham) Marshall, Dr Edmund (Goole) Watkins, David
English, Michael Marshall, Jim (Leicester South) Weetch, Ken
Ennals, Rt Hon David Martin, Michael (Gl'gow, Springb'rn) Welsh, Michael
Evans, Ioan (Aberdare) Mason, Rt Hon Roy White, Frank R. (Bury & Radcliffe)
Evans, John (Newton) Maynard, Miss Joan Whitehead, Phillip
Faulds, Andrew Meacher, Michael Whitlock, William
Field, Frank Mellish, Rt Hon Robert Williams, Rt Hon Alan (Swansea W)
Flannery, Martin Mikardo, Ian Williams, Sir Thomas (Warrington)
Fletcher, Ted (Darlington) Millan, Rt Hon Bruce Winnick, David
Foot, Rt Hon Michael Miller, Dr M. S. (East Kilbride) Woolmer, Kenneth
Ford, Ben Mitchell, Austin (Grimsby) Wrigglesworth, Ian
Forrester, John Mitchell, R. C. (Soton, ltchen) Young, David (Bolton East)
Foster, Derek Morris, Rt Hon Alfred (Wythenshawe)
Foulkes, George Morris, Rt Hon Charles (Openshaw) TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Fraser, John (Lambeth, Norwood) Morris, Rt Hon John (Aberavon) Mr. George Morton and
Freeson, Rt Hon Reginald Moyle, Rt Hon Roland Mr. James Tinn.

Question accordingly agreed to.

Bill read the Third time and passed.