LORDS AMENDMENT. (Hansard, 6 August 1924)

§ LORD STRACHIE:
My Lords, as I was responsible for the Amendment, I may explain that this Bill deals with houses provided by the local authorities, and in its clauses refers to houses for the working classes. It is clear that the Bill was not intended to find houses for poorly-paid clerks and people of that type, but was intended to provide houses for people receiving a weekly wage. When this Amendment came before the House of Commons Mr. Wheatley rose in his place and moved that the House doth agree with the Lords Amendment, and it was only when objection was taken below the gangway, and the case of the poor clerk was mentioned, that the Government, under pressure, withdrew their agreement. It does seem to me that when the local authorities are asked to spend very large sums of money in the provision of houses for the working classes, and to put a heavy charge upon the local rates, we ought not to go outside those who are receiving weekly wages. Otherwise, 472 doctors who are not very well off or others of a like class may be provided with houses at the expense of the local rates.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY:
I am considerably puzzled by the action of the Commons in respect of this Amendment, because this is not the only place in which your Lordships inserted the phrase " who are members of the working classes." In Clause (2) (a), on line 24 of page 6, your Lordships inserted the same words " who are members of the working classes." I have been given to understand, although one cannot be certain, that the Commons have not disagreed with that phrase in the second instance that I have pointed out.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR:
They have.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY:
Then it is a very unreasonable proceeding. I do not understand on what possible ground you can justify the spending of these large sums of money unless the houses are to be let to people of the working classes. I do not know whether the noble and learned Viscount suggests that there is a difficulty in the definition of " working classes." I think the phrase appears in many Housing Acts which have been passed.

§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR:
It was not only from the Labour side in the House of Commons that this was pressed. It was pressed by Sir William Joynson-Hicks and by Mr. Masterman—the Conservatives and the Liberals—and the case made was so strong that the Government were convinced. " The working classes " is a perfectly vague phrase. There is no difference between a man who gets 35s. a week for working with his hands and the man who gets 35s. a week for working with his pen.