HL Deb 28 February 1929 vol 72 cc1182-93

Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Lord Desborough.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly:

[The EARL OF DONOUGHMORE in the Chair.]

Clause 1:

Power to make regulations as to cotton cloth factories.

1.—(1) The Secretary of State may make regulations for the purpose of giving effect to the recommendations contained in the Report, dated the twenty-third day of January, nineteen hundred and twenty-eight, of the Committee appointed by the Secretary of State on the fifth day of November, nineteen hundred and twenty-four, to consider and report whether, and, if so, what modifications of the existing statutory regulations governing the use of artificial humidity in cotton cloth factories are desirable and practicable.

(3) Regulations made under this Act may be substituted for the provisions contained in sections ninety, ninety-one, ninety-two and ninety-four of the principal Act and in the Fourth Schedule to that Act, or for any of those provisions, and any of those provisions for which regulations are so substituted shall cease to apply as respects cotton cloth factories.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM had given Notice to omit the words "The Secretary of State may make regulations" at the beginning of the clause, and to add to subsection (1) the words "the regulations set out in the Schedule to this Act shall have effect." The noble Lord said: In moving the first Amendment which stands in my name, I should mention that there is a further Amendment, which is consequential. The effect of my Amendments would be to make the clause read as follows:— 1.—(1) For the purpose of giving effect to the recommendations contained in the Report, dated the twenty-third day of January, nineteen hundred and twenty-eight, of the Committee appointed by the Secretary of State on the fifth day of November, nineteen hundred and twenty-four, to consider and report whether, and, if so, what modifications of the existing statutory regulations governing the use of artificial humidity in cotton cloth factories are desirable and practicable, the regulations set out in the Schedule to this Act shall have effect. The result of the Amendments, if carried, would be that the regulations would have to be set out in the Schedule. I have not set out those regulations because I thought that the Government having superior knowledge would be able to set out the regulations in the Schedule better than I could do it myself. The result of the Amendments would be to limit the Act to the regulations mentioned in this particular clause. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 1, line 6, leave out ("the Secretary of State may make regulations").—(Lord Banbury of Southam.)

LORD DESBOROUGH

I find it very difficult to understand these Amendments which talk about regulations set out in the Schedule and say that they shall have effect. There is no Schedule and there are no regulations set out in it. As that is the case I do not see that this particular Amendment makes any sense. Its object apparently is to take out of the hands of the Secretary of State the power of making regulations with regard to this Bill.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM

No. The object is to have in the Schedule the regulations which would be given effect to so that people can see them. There is no Schedule at the moment. I left it to the Government to put that in. They are cleverer people than I am.

LORD DESBOROUGH

I fully admit that; but there is no Motion. The noble Lord ought to have begun with a Motion saying that the regulations instead of being drawn up by the Secretary of State in the manner set out in the Bill should be put into a Schedule. There is no Motion to that effect.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM

Yes, in line 16, at the end of subsection (1) that is done.

LORD DESBOROUGH

I beg leave to differ. There is nothing of the sort. There would have to be a Motion first to put regulations in the Bill, and then the Secretary of State should be confined to them, but even supposing the Amendment were in order, it would upset the whole practice of the last forty years with regard to Factory Acts. Power has always been given to the Secretary of State to draw up regulations with regard to the Cotton Factory Acts and other Acts. These regulations are of a most intricate character; they never have been inserted in an Act of Parliament and it is quite unnecessary that they should be. What the Secretary of State acquires under this Act is something which the Secretary of State has been in the habit of having for the last forty years. In all these Acts he has that power to draw up regulations. What is proposed in this particular ease is that the Secretary of State should have, as he had in the Act of 1911, passed by a Liberal Government, and in a previous Act passed by a Conservative Government, power to draw up these regulations, and in this particular case it is proposed that when the Secretary of State has drawn up draft regulations he shall submit them to the employers and employed. Fortunately, after the lapse of some fifty years, and after three years of careful inquiry by a very competent Committee, an agreement has been reached between the employers and the employed.

Later on I propose—and I hope the House will consider that that will be a satisfactory solution and enable Parliament to keep its hold over these regulations—an Amendment that these regulations should be laid before both Houses of Parliament for thirty days so that Parliament, after having; seen the regulations should have absolute power either to delay them or to refuse sanction to them. I hope that Amendment, which I shall move later, will satisfy my noble friend. I can assure him that the Government in this particular case have been most solicitous to meet all objections. There was during the Second Heading rather a misapprehension that the Papers had not been laid before Parliament. The Report of the Departmental Committee on this matter was laid before this House on March 28 of last year so that the House really had ample opportunity to become familiar with it. The only complaint made was that the Government had been rather dilatory in carrying out the recommendations of this Committee. As a matter of fact, the recommendations are very good ones, and I think that both the House and the country are very much indebted to this Committee for the admirable Report they brought out on a subject which has been in dispute for the last fifty years.

It was objected to on the last occasion on the ground that it was a Departmental Committee, but there was only one Departmental representative on the Committee, and that was the Sub-inspector of Factories, Mr. Jackson, who has enormous experience of factories in Lancashire. He was thought to be the best person to serve and was appointed Chairman of the Committee. There was represented on the Committee a number of societies such as the Cotton Industry Research Association, the National Institute of Medical Research and the Industrial Fatigue Research Board, and it was hoped that, as a result of their labours, there would, after fifty years, be a unanimous Report which would be acceptable to those engaged, not in a dangerous occupation but an occupation which is carried on under circumstances of great heat and artificial humidity which are distressing to those employed in it. The Government propose to follow the usual precedent in this country in regard to these Acts, and to give the Secretary of State power to draw up these regulations which will be submitted first of all to those who are chiefly concerned—the employers and the employees. Then the regulations will be laid upon the Table of Parliament for thirty days so that Parliament will have the absolute power of approving or disapproving them. I hope, therefore, the House will consider that these suggested Amendments are not only unusual but unnecessary, and, as I submit, out of order as they refer to a Schedule which does not exist.

THE MARQUESS OF READING

I hope my noble friend who moved the Amendment will not persist in it. I think the Government have since the criticism acted very fairly. They gave an undertaking as to what course they would pursue, and, as the noble Lord, Lord Desborough, has indicated, everything will be done to carry into effect the suggestion made by my noble friend Lord Beauchamp, which suggestion—that these regulations should be laid on the Table of the House—I submit, really represents the views of the House better than the Amendment. To embody regulations in the Schedule of an Act of Parliament would cause very great inconvenience, because, if any amendment were required to be made as the result of agreement between employers and employed, that amendment would have to be the subject of legislation if you had introduced such a Schedule into the Act. This proposal of placing the regulations on the Table of the House for thirty days is a much more convenient way of dealing with the matter for it will enable further regulations to be made as and when the situation requires them to be made. I think the criticisms have had value for they have led to the Government taking the step which is now proposed and it is, I think, all the Government could be asked to do.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM

I quite agree with what was said just now that my Amendment, if carried, would alter the practice which has been going on for forty years. That is exactly what I want to do. There has been a bad practice going on for forty years and I want to stop it. For forty years Government Departments have said to themselves: "We are going to do certain things. We do not care twopence for the House of Lords or the House of Commons: we are going to do them." That is what I want to stop. I want to restore the power of the House of Commons and of the House of Lords. I quite agree that my two first Amendments are not practicable unless the Government would agree to draw up a Schedule and put the regulations in it. As my noble friend says he will not do that, of course it will not be of any use my pressing the Amendment, and I do not propose to do so. I may have a word or two to say later upon the question of the efficacy of laying these regulations on the Table. In the meantime I ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM moved, at the end of subsection (1), to insert: "Provided that no regulation so made shall have the force of law unless it does merely give effect to some or other of the recommendations aforesaid." The noble Lord said: This Amendment was not drawn up by me but by a member of this House who was at one time one of the leading Judges in the kingdom. Therefore there is no question about its being properly and well drawn. The object of it is to provide that the recommendations which may be given the force of law by regulations shall be those recommendations which are in the Report. I hope my noble friend will accept this Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 1, line 16, at end insert ("Provided that no regulation so made shall have the force of law unless it does merely give effect to some or other of the recommendations aforesaid").—(Lord Banbury of Southam.)

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

I hope the noble Lord in charge of the Bill will accept the Amendment because on referring to the Cotton Cloth Factories Act, 1911, one finds in the corresponding section the words "for the protection of health in cotton cloth factories." When in this Bill we find no such words one's suspicions are aroused. I therefore hope the noble Lord will put in some words of limitation.

LORD DESBOROUGH

A great deal of unnecessary suspicion has been aroused about this Bill, which I really think is much more circumscribed and has been much more carefully gone into than Bills dealing with cotton factories have been in times gone by. As a matter of fact, as I have told your Lordships, the Report was published a year ago. Not one single member of your Lordships' House asked for this Report for a whole, year, or very nearly a whole year. The Bill was read a second time and a fortnight was given before the Committee stage was taken. During that fortnight not a single Peer asked for a copy of the Report.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM

Oh, yes, I did.

LORD DESBOROUGH

On the day of the Second Reading.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM

I did not know of it before.

LORD DESBOROUGH

The Report was before Parliament as a Command Paper for a whole year and not a single noble Lord asked for it. I submit that a Report which has taken a very distinguished body of men more than three years to prepare cannot be assimilated by my noble friend in an hour. I greatly regret that on the day of the Second Reading there happened to be no copies of the Report available—that had nothing to do with me—but I am told that the reason was that the Report had not been asked for and so there were no copies in the Bill Office. I took care that copies should be sent to those noble Lords who took part in the debate, and I took the opportunity to enquire at the Bill Office as to whether there had been a great rush for this Report. Not one single copy had been asked for by any single Peer, and the only copy that was asked for was asked for by one who is not a member of your Lordships' House. I do not know therefore, that noble Lords are very fully equipped for discussing those regulations. As regards this particular Amendment, the matter is already provided for in the Bill. The Bill says:— The Secretary of State may make regulations for the purpose of giving effect to the recommendations contained in the Report. I do not know that you want to strengthen that in any way. I think the Amendment of my noble friend would rather weaken it, because I do not know that the language of his Amendment is very good. It says:— … merely give effect to some or other of the recommendations. I do not know what those words mean. The intention of the Bill is to give effect to all the recommendations.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM

The Amendment would not stop that.

LORD DESBOROUGH

Then I do not see that the words in the Amendment strengthen the words which are already in the Bill. The Bill is perfectly simple. Noble Lords, if a later Amendment is carried, will have a full calendar month during the sitting of Parliament to see the regulations that have been drawn up before they come into operation, and they will be able, therefore, to see that they do really carry out the recommendations contained in the Report. I do not see that the words of the Amendment add any strength to the Bill and they seem to me to be absolutely unnecessary. I may say that I do not think either the owners of these mills or the operatives in them would be satisfied if they lost the Bill this year. We want to get the Bill through before the hot weather, because the temperature in these factories sometimes rises to 80° Fahr. or more. These regulations are intended by ventilation and in other ways to reduce the temperature which rises to an unpleasant height.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM

I do not quite understand the argument of my noble friend. This particular Amendment will not delay the Bill in any way. If it would only bring on a little hot weather I should be very pleased, but it will not in any way delay the Bill. My noble friend asked the meaning of "some or other." As I told him this is not my Amendment. It was drawn up by a noble and learned Lord, a member of this House, and he asked me to put it down. He probably is a good judge of legal phraseology. As far as I can see the only effect of the Amendment would be to make it quite certain that the Secretary of State, or officials in the Department, should do nothing but bring into operation the recommendations, or any of them or some of them. I really hope the noble Lord will accept the Amendment. It does not in any way interfere with the Bill. It only makes it clear that the Secretary of State must confine himself to the recommendations in the Report.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

LORD DESBOROUGH moved to leave out subsection (3). The noble Lord said: This matter has really been discussed already rather prematurely. I am moving the omission of the subsection in order to insert a new subsection as follows:— (3) Before any regulations are made under this Act a draft thereof shall be laid before each House of Parliament for a period of not less than thirty days during the Session of Parliament, and if either House before the expiration of that period resolves that the regulations shall not come into force, no further proceedings shall be taken thereon, but without prejudice to the making of any new draft regulations. I hope your Lordships will agree to this Amendment. During the Second Reading debate it was suggested, I think, that the period should be forty days and the noble Marquess the Leader of the House proposed twenty-one Parliamentary days. If we can get a clear calendar month I think that will be sufficient. There is a danger of the Bill not coming into operation before the hot weather and the words "without prejudice to the making of any new draft regulations" are inserted so that the Secretary of State shall not be prohibited from submitting under the same conditions new draft regulations so that it may be possible to get the Bill into operation. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Clause 1, page 2, line 5, leave out subsection (3).—(Lord Desborough.)

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

I should have preferred, instead of "during the Session of Parliament" to have brought it more in conformity with other Bills, such as the Local Government Bill, Section 122, which reads "if an address is presented within the next subsequent 21 days on which the House is sitting." Under the present words "during the Session of Parliament," this House may not have sat 21 days. I should be glad if the noble Lord would consider the point between now and the Report stage.

LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM

I think the alteration proposed is a good one. "Not less than 30 days during the Session of Parliament." I suppose "Session of Parliament," is well known, but we may go away at Easter for sixteen or seventeen days, and that will reduce the thirty days to thirteen, and I think either what my noble friend suggests, or "sitting days," should be adopted. I would now like to say a word or two on the value of this proposal. I am not going to resist it, because it is better than nothing, but as regards the House of Commons it is not worth the paper it is written upon. I believe Lord Salisbury rather suggested this Amendment, and I am going to quote to him an authority which I know he will respect as to the efficacy of this proposal in the House of Commons.

Only two or three weeks ago I was sitting on a Committee next to Lord Hugh Cecil, and a proposal was made, and he turned to me and said: "No one knows better than you do that the proposal is utterly useless in the House of Commons. Nobody knows anything about it, it can only come on after 11 o'clock, and no one knows where to find it." It took me about twenty years to find out where these notices were, and then I found them in the desk of the Clerk at the Table. In order to get at them you had to ask him to open his desk, which was probably full of other things. Then perhaps the Speaker would address him, and he had to ask you to wait. It was very difficult to get them, and after you had them you could only move in the matter after 11 o'clock at night, when nearly everyone had gone, and if attention was called to the fact that there were not forty members present, the whole thing was over. In this House it is quite different. You can find out where the notices are, and move them at a reasonable time. So far as this House is concerned there is some protection, but none in the House of Commons.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Amendment moved—

Page 2, line 5, at end insert:— ("(3) Before any regulations are made under this Act a draft thereof shall be laid before each House of Parliament for a period of not less than thirty days during the Session of Parliament, and if either House before the expiration of that period resolves that the regulations shall not come into force, no further proceedings shall be taken thereon, but without prejudice to the making of any new draft regulations.")—(Lord Desborough.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 2 agreed to.

Clause 3:

Short title, citation, construction, repeal and extent.

(4) The Factory and Workshop (Cotton Cloth Factories) Act, 1911, is hereby repealed: Provided that any regulation or requirement made or certificate or notice given under that Act or any regulation made thereunder, which is in force at the commencement of this Act, shall continue in force and have effect as though it had been made or given under this Act or under the regulations made thereunder as the case may be.

LORD DESBOROUGH moved to leave out of subsection (4) the words "Factory and Workshop (Cotton Cloth Factories) Act, 1911, is" and to insert "provisions of Sections ninety, ninety-one, ninety-two and ninety-four of the principal Act and of the Fourth Schedule to that Act, so far as those provisions relate to cotton cloth factories, and the Factory and Workshop (Cotton Cloth Factories) Act, 1911, are." The noble Lord said: Objection was taken on the Second Reading that the Secretary of State had power to repeal certain sections of an Act of Parliament. That was only following the precedent of former Bills, but in deference to wishes expressed the power is now given to Parliament to do this, and when this Bill becomes law these sections become inoperative so far as they relate to cotton cloth factories.

Amendment moved— Page 2, line 40, leave out from ("The") to ("hereby") in line 41, and insert the said new words.—(Lord Desborough.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD DESBOROUGH

The next Amendment is consequential.

Amendment moved— Page 3, line 2, leave out ("that Act") and insert ("the Factory and Workshop (Cotton Cloth Factories) Act, 1911").—(Lord Desborough.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 3, as amended, agreed to.