HL Deb 15 June 1938 vol 109 cc973-91

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

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly:

[The EARL OF ONSLOW in the Chair.]

Clause 1:

Conditions of employment.

1.—(1) The total hours worked by a young person to whom this Act applies (in this Act referred to as "a designated person"), exclusive of intervals allowed for meals and rest, shall,—

  1. (a) in the case of a designated person who has attained the age of sixteen years, not exceed forty-eight in any week;
  2. (b) in the case of a designated person who has not attained the age of sixteen years, not exceed, during two years from the commencement of this Act forty-eight in any week, and thereafter, forty-four in any week:

Provided that, a designated person who has attained the age sixteen years may, on occasions of seasonal or other special pressure or in cases of emergency, work overtime, that is to say, in excess of the permitted weekly hours, so, however, that the overtime worked by that person shall not exceed six hours in any week or fifty hours in any year, and where in any year, in connection with a business carried on at any premises, overtime employment of any designated person under an employer has taken place in twelve weeks (whether consecutive or not), no further overtime employment of that or any other designated person under that employer or under any person succeeding to his business shall, during the remainder of that year, take place in connection with the business carried on at those premises.

(2) A designated person shall not be employed continuously for more than five hours without an interval of at least half an hour for a meal or rest, and where the hours of employment include the hours from half-past eleven in the morning to half-past two in the afternoon, an interval of not less than three-quarters of an hour shall be allowed between those hours for dinner.

(4) A designated person shall, in every period of twenty-four hours between midday on one day and midday on the next day be allowed an interval of at least eleven consecutive hours which shall include the hours from ten o'clock in the evening until six o'clock in the morning.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER moved, in subsection (1), to leave out "(in this Act referred to as a designated person ')." The noble Earl said: There are on the Marshalled List of Amendments a large number which stand in my name. They are moved, in fact, to remove that rather inharmonious phrase "designated person." I will therefore formally move the first one which stands in my name and the remainder of the Amendments are practically all consequential. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 1, line 8, leave out ("(in this Act referred to as 'a designated person')").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE LORD CHAIRMAN

The Amendments that follow before we come to that of the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, are consequential.

Amendments moved— Page 1, line 11, leave out ("designated") Page 1, line 14, leave out ("designated") Page 2, line 1 leave out ("designated") Page 2, line 5, leave out ("overtime") and insert ("number of hours overtime that may be").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

THE EARL OF LISTOWEL moved, in the proviso in subsection (1), to substitute "five hours" for "six hours." The noble Earl said: I should like if I may to explain the reason for this Amendment and the other Amendments that stand in my name. This is an agreed measure, and I think that it might be interpreted as a failure to keep our part of the bargain if any of these Amendments were pressed to a Division, however much support might be forthcoming from different quarters of the House. Therefore, although I shall hope to persuade the Government that these Amendments are definitely calculated to promote the interests of the young people which this Bill seeks to protect, I shall not go beyond the utmost effort to produce that change of mind on these matters on the part of the Government. That of course is my first object. But my second is this: in this case and in the other cases to which I am drawing attention, the Government have left on one side the recommendations which occur in the Report of the Departmental Committee which the Government set up into the hours of employment of young persons in certain unregulated occupations, and I and my colleagues are exceedingly anxious to have a public statement from the Government of the reasons which have led them to substitute proposals of a different nature, and proposals of their own, for the recommendations of the Departmental Committee.

It would perhaps be as well if I were to ask the Government to regard what I say as being in the nature of a preface to my remarks on all the Amendments which stand in my name and a preface which naturally will not be repeated on another occasion. The first Amendment is aimed at reducing the number of hours of overtime which are allowed under the Bill for young persons between the ages of sixteen and eighteen from six to five hours per week. I cannot say, personally, that I relish the idea of overtime for these young people, however short it may he. It is, I think, necessary that it should be limited to an absolute minimum, and I should like to draw the attention of the Government to the recommendation of the Departmental Committee on this matter. At page 31, paragraph 105, the five members of this Committee, whose Report is unanimous, say: For young persons of sixteen and over we should be prepared to countenance a certain amount of overtime, but subject to restriction both as to its amount and as to the number of weeks in which it may be worked. We consider that the amount should not exceed five hours in any week and fifty hours in any year. The number of hours in any year has been accepted by the Government, but they have allowed, not five hours a week, as proposed by the Committee, but as many as six hours a week, and I think one is bound to be apprehensive about the amount of continued education that would be put in by a young person who would be naturally exhausted by a long spell of overtime in any one week. I very much hope that the Government may be able to meet us on this point, and, if not, that they will state why they have decided to put on one side the very definite and unanimous recommendation of the Departmental Committee.

Amendment moved— Page 2, line 6, leave out ("six") and insert ("five").—(The Earl of Listowel.)

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

It is perfectly true to say that this Amendment, and the next one in the name of the noble Lord, are in accordance with the recommendations in paragraph 105 of the Report of the Departmental Committee. The proposals in the Bill have been designed to follow as far as possible Section 98 of the Factories Act, 1937, which applies to some of the young persons covered by the Committee's recommendations, and it seems desirable to maintain uniformity in the conditions applicable, for example, to van boys employed by transport undertakings and those employed in the business of a factory. The proposals of the Government in the Bill are in conformity with the policy approved last year by Parliament after the Committee had reported. It may be observed that under these Amendments an employer, to obtain full advantage of the fifty hours overtime allowed, would have to employ young persons for the full five hours in each of the ten weeks, whereas he might not need to keep them more than an hour or two in some weeks, and so the remaining hours would be wasted. I would suggest to the noble Earl that, for the sake of uniformity, we had far better follow what is provided and stated in Section 98 of the Factories Act, and I therefore hope that he will see his way to withdraw this and the other Amendment which stand in his name.

THE EARL OF LISTOWEL

I appreciate the reason given by the noble Earl, but naturally I should like to express a wish that it might have been possible subsequently to have modified the Factories Act, in order to bring young persons who are at work in occupations that come under that Act into line with an improvement in the conditions for young persons working in occupations that will be covered by this Bill. At the same time I appreciate the reason that has been given, and I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The next Amendment is consequential.

Amendment moved— Page 2, line 6, leave out ("hours").—(The Earl of Munster.)

LORD STRABOLGI

I have been looking at the Amendment, and I do not think it improves the Bill. I hope that in this I shall have the support of the noble Viscount, Lord Bertie of Thame. I think you can go too far in cutting out words, especially where an Act will have to be read and understood by all sorts of people.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

As the noble Lord has mentioned my name, I think he is right. I have not studied the Amendment before, so I have not had time fully to consider it.

LORD STRABOLGI

With that encouragement let me explain. Reading the Bill in the ordinary way, if amended as proposed it will read "the overtime worked by that person shall not exceed six in any week or fifty in any year." Six what, or fifty what? What is the advantages of leaving out the word "hours."

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

This has to be considered in connection with my other Amendments. Page 2, line 5, now reads "the number of hours overtime that may be worked by that person shall not exceed" six in any week or fifty in any year. If read with the last Amendment in my name the clause as I further propose to amend it reads better than it would as it now stands in the Bill.

LORD STRABOLGI

I do not think the Amendment is necessary, but the noble Earl can have it his own way.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The next two Amendments are consequential.

Amendments moved— Page 2, line 7, leave out ("hours") Page 2, line 9, leave out ("designated person") and insert ("young persons to whom this Act applies").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

THE EARL OF LISTOWEL moved, in the proviso in subsection (1), to leave out "twelve weeks" and insert "ten weeks." The noble Earl said: I am not going to weary the House with a repetition of my previous argument. The only question which I would like to ask the Government on this Amendment is as follows. The amount of overtime under the Shops Acts for young persons is a maximum of six weeks in the year. Why should the Government regard it as more important to have uniformity with the Factories Acts, under which the number of weeks in which overtime would be allowed is twelve, than with the Shops Act which allows a smaller number of weeks in which these young people can be employed for a longer period than normal?

Amendment moved— Page 2, line 10, leave out ("twelve") and insert ("ten").—(The Earl of Listowel.)

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The answer to the noble Earl's question is that in the Shops Act it is quite true the overtime is limited to six weeks in the year, but I think it was felt by my right honourable friend that this was too short a time to meet the needs of some of the industries to which this Bill refers. However, I should like to look into that point again, and if there are any further remarks to be made upon it I would let the noble Earl know between now and the next stage.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The next two Amendments are consequential.

Amendments moved— Page 2, line 12, leave out ("that or any other designated person") and insert ("any such persons") Page 2, line 16, leave out ("designated person") and insert ("young person to whom this Act applies").—(The, Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

THE EARL OF LISTOWEL moved, at the end of subsection (2), to insert "if taken on the premises, and of not less than one hour if taken elsewhere." The noble Earl said: This is an Amendment which aims again at carrying out a very definite recommendation of the Departmental Committee's Report, which, in paragraph 17, states: We recommend, therefore, that the intervals for meals should be fixed by statutory provisions similar to those contained in the Shops Acts. In the recent Shops Act an interval of an hour is allowed for dinner in the middle of the day if the meal is taken outside the premises. The object of this Amendment is to extend the dinner interval from three-quarters of an hour to an hour in order to cover the time taken in coming and going, when the place of the meal is outside the place of employment. This appears to be a very reasonable Amendment, and one that would actually make this Bill uniform with the Shops Act—a point I think of some importance, as the noble Earl has contended that he wants uniformity in the various Acts that deal with this subject.

Amendment moved— Page 2, line 22, at end insert ("if taken on the premises, and of not less than one hour if taken elsewhere.").—(The Earl of Listowel.)

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

When last year we were dealing with other young Persons in the Factories Act—Section 98 of the Factories Act—Parliament did not think it necessary to require an interval of more than three-quarters of an hour for dinner. I am advised that this Amendment might conceivably prove to be very irksome, and it is doubtful whether it would be of any value whatever to certain classes of young persons who are employed. The noble Earl is perfectly correct in saying that we desire uniformity, and the uniformity that we desire is that of Section 98 of the Factories Act. If the noble Earl will turn up Section 98 (8) of that Act, he will see that the words used there are precisely similar to those inserted in this Bill. I cannot help thinking that it would be far wiser to leave the Bill as it is, in uniformity with Section 98 of the Factories Act, of which your Lordships approved last year.

LORD STRABOLGI

I think the noble Earl is ill-advised, and I am going to call to my aid the President of the Board of Education. He knows, as I know, that young, growing people ought to have sufficient time for their meals. It is not good for their health to hurry through their meals. They ought to rest after them, especially after the mid-day meal. In the Royal Navy they are very insistent on that with the boys at sea. Seamen are allowed one hour and ten minutes for their mid-day meal and their run. The boys do not have any run, but they have the same time, and I always insisted on their not being disturbed. And they are all having their meals on the spot. In this Bill only three-quarters of an hour is allowed for young persons having their meals on the premises. My noble friend Lord Listowel wants to add a quarter of an hour when they have to go out to their meals. That seems most reasonable. I would ask the Government to reconsider this, and I would appeal to the President of the Board of Education in the matter, because I know what a strong view his Department takes on the body being as healthy as the brain.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

I appreciate what the noble Lord says, but there are genuine difficulties attached to accepting this Amendment. But as he has given me the opportunity of re-examining this Amendment, between now and the next stage I shall be glad to take the opportunity.

THE EARL OF LISTOWEL

I am delighted by the assurance of the noble Earl that he will consider the question raised by this Amendment, and I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The next two Amendments are consequential.

Amendments moved— Page 2, line 24, leave out ("designated person") and insert ("young person to whom this Act applies") Page 2, line 27, leave out ("designated person") and insert ("young person to whom this Act applies").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

VISCOUNT SAMUEL moved to add to subsection (4): in the case of a designated person who has attained the age of sixteen years, and the hours from eight o'clock in the evening until seven o'clock in the morning in the case of a designated person who has not attained the age of sixteen years. The noble Viscount said: Perhaps before moving this Amendment I might be allowed to join in the congratulations that have already been tendered to the noble Earl, Lord Munster, from my noble friends near me. He has succeeded to an office honourable but honorary. I always think that the office of Paymaster-General, which he now holds, being that which superintends the payments of salary to the whole of the public service while the Paymaster-General receives none himself, is the nearest approach in our modern life to muzzling the ox which treads out the corn. However, we are all very pleased that the noble Earl has received this preferment.

The Amendment brings up a point which I raised on Second Reading. The Bill deals with all young persons from the age of fourteen to eighteen. With regard to night work there is to be an interval of eleven hours, but some of them are allowed to start at six o'clock in the morning, and others are allowed to end their work as late as ten o'clock at night. Of course those who begin at six cannot be the same ones as those who end at ten, because the eleven hours' interval would not be allowed for in such a case. But in the case of those who begin at six o'clock in the morning at their work place, if you allow for the time of transit from their homes to their work, for a meal, and for dressing and preparation, they have to rise at five o'clock in the morning; and those who end at ten at night will not be able, as a rule, to get to their rest before at least eleven o'clock. I suggest that for boys and girls, at all events those of fourteen and fifteen years of age, these hours are very deleterious. Certainly they would make impossible all chance of continuing their education, and would leave very little opportunity for measures to maintain their physical fitness, to which importance is so rightly attached in these days, especially for young people.

The Factories Act of 1937 provides that young persons shall not work later than 6 p.m. I am not proposing in these cases to cut down the hours as low as that, but I do suggest that they should be required to terminate their work not later than 8 p.m. My Amendment makes that suggestion and further suggests that in the mornings the hours should not be earlier than 7 a.m. The arguments for it have now been sufficiently stated, and I shall do no more than move this Amendment and express the hope that the Government may see their way to accept it.

Amendment moved— Page 2, line 32, at end insert the said new words.—(Viscount Samuel.)

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The noble Viscount who has moved this Amendment will realise that His Majesty's Government are not in favour of young persons working either at very early hours or at very late hours, but after careful, close, and sympathetic consideration we came to the conclusion that we were quite unable to accept the Amendment which the noble Viscount has moved. I again refer him as I did on the Second Reading, to subsection (6) of this clause, which gives to the Secretary of State power to prescribe by regulations further conditions for the purpose of safeguarding the welfare and interests of young persons, including conditions with respect to the daily period of their employment—that is to say, the period inclusive of the time allowed for meals and rest within which these persons may be employed on any one day.

If the noble Viscount will refer to the Report of the Departmental Committee upon which this Bill is based, he will find that that Committee did not think it necessary to impose such a drastic definition of night employment, and after considering the International Convention which is embodied in the Employment of Women, Young Persons and Children Act, 1920, and prohibits the employment of young persons between the hours of 10p.m. and 5a.m., not 6a.m., they only felt justified in recommending the restriction which is proposed in the Bill. The Amendment does go considerably beyond the existing law which is applicable to young persons in comparable occupations. Neither the Shops Acts nor Section 98 of the Factories Act specifically fixes hours of starting and finishing work except the provisions relating to night work, which correspond to the proposals in the Bill. It is true that Section 70 of the Factories Act provides that the period of employment of young persons employed in a factory shall not begin before seven in the morning or end later than six in the evening in the case of young persons under sixteen, and eight in the evening in all other cases; but although Parliament fixed these hours for young persons employed in factories, when the cases of van boys and messengers were dealt with in the same Bill no hours of commencing or finishing work were laid down, but only conditions as to night employment identical with the proposals in the Bill.

I would also commend to your Lordships' attention the fact that when Section 98 of the Factories Act was before your Lordships' House last year the noble Viscount, Lord Samuel, moved no Amendment to it, and indeed the whole of that clause passed without any discussion in this House whatsoever. I emphasize again that what we are doing in this Bill is only supplementing what has been laid down in other Acts—in the Shops Acts and in Section 98 of the Factories Act—and it does seem to us it would be unfortunate not to keep the law as far as possible uniform. There is very little further I can add in reply to the noble Viscount, but I should like him to recollect that that section of the Factories Act to which I have drawn attention is one that does touch upon the employment of van boys and messengers, and when it was before the House no noble Lord made any suggestion whatever that the hours were too long or that employment started too early in the morning or ended too late at night. In these circumstances I hope the noble Viscount will let this clause go through in its present form in conformity with that section of the Factories Act.

VISCOUNT SAMUEL

I am somewhat disappointed at the negative reply of the noble Earl, but in the circumstances I ask leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The remaining Amendments to this clause are consequential, and I would ask leave to move them en bloc.

Amendments moved— Page 2, line 33, leave out ("designated person") and insert ("young person to whom this Act applies") Page 3, line 1, leave out ("designated persons") and insert ("young persons to whom this Act applies or any class of them") Page 3, line 2, leave out ("maximum") Page 3, line 3, leave out ("a designated person shall not") and insert ("no such person shall") Page 3, line 8, leave out ("by a designated person") Page 3, line 9, after ("week") insert ("by a young person to whom this Act applies") Page 3, line 11, after ("place") insert ("in connection with a business carried on") Page 3, line 17, leave out ("of the designated person").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 2 [Options as to application of Act]:

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The Amendments to this clause are also consequential and perhaps I may be permitted to move them en bloc.

Amendments moved— Page 3, line 31, leave out ("designated persons") and insert ("young persons to whom the provisions of this Act apply") Page 3, line 37, leave out ("designated") and insert ("first mentioned") Page 3, line 39, leave out ("young persons to whom the provisions of the Shops Acts apply") and insert ("last mentioned persons") Page 3, line 41, leave out ("those") and insert ("the Shops") Page 4, line 6, leave out ("designated persons") and insert ("young persons to whom the provisions of this Act apply") Page 4, line 10, leave out ("those") and insert ("the Shops") Page 4, line 10, leave out ("designated") and insert ("first mentioned").(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 3 [Records and notices]:

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The Amendments to this clause are also consequential and I would move them together.

Amendments moved— Page 4, line 22, leave out ("designated persons") and insert ("young persons to whom this Act applies") Page 4, line 29, leave out ("designated persons") and insert ("young persons to whom this Act applies") Page 4, line 31, leave out ("notices") and insert ("a notice") Page 4, line 38, leave out ("of the designated persons").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 3, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 4 and 5 agreed to.

Clause 6 [Enforcement]:

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The Amendments to this clause are likewise consequential.

Amendments moved— Page 6, line 7, leave out ("in the circumstances specified in") and insert ("as provided by") Page 6, line 17, leave out ("designated persons") and insert ("young persons to whom this Act applies") Page 6, line 26, leave out ("designated") and insert ("young") Page 6, line 39, leave out ("designated") and insert ("young") Page 6, line 40, leave out ("any") and insert ("a").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 6, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 7 [Provisions as to offences]:

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

There are two consequential Amendments to this clause, and I would move them together.

Amendments moved— Page 7, line 16, leave out ("designated persons") and insert ("young persons to whom this Act applies") Page 7, line 17, at end insert (",and references to the occupier or owner of a factory shall be deemed to include references to the employer of those persons").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 7, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 8 and 9 agreed to.

Clause 10:

Young persons to whom Act applies.

(3) This Act shall not apply— (a) to a young person whose hours of employment are regulated by or under the Factories Act, 1937, the Coal Mines Act, 19[1, and the Acts amending that Act, the Metalliferous Mines Regulation Acts, 1872 and 1875, or (except in the case of a young person to whom this Act applies by virtue of an election made under subsection (1) of Section two thereof) the Shops Acts;

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The first three Amendments to this clause are consequential.

Amendments moved— Page 8, line 16, after ("employment") insert ("in connection with a business carried on") Page 9, line, 4, leave out ("This Act shall not") and insert ("Nothing in this Act shall") Page 9, line 5, leave out ("to") and insert ("with respect to the employment of").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

VISCOUNT HORNE OF SLAMANNAN moved, in paragraph (a) of subsection (3), after "1937," to insert "the Railways Act, 1921." The noble Viscount said: As no doubt your Lordships are well aware, the Bill provides that there should be certain exemptions from its provisions, and in particular in Clause 10 (3) it is provided that this Act shall not apply to a young person whose hours of employment are regulated by or under the Factories Act, 1937, the Coal Mines Act, 1911, and the Acts amending that Act, the Metalliferous Mines Regulations Acts, 1872 and 1875, or… the Shops Acts. The reason for these exemptions is that there are sufficiently protective provisions in the Acts to which I have made reference. What I suggest to the Committee is that included amongst the various Acts to which the present Bill shall not apply there should be the Railways Act, 1921.

The reason why I move this Amendment is that the Railways Act, 1921, made very sufficient and adequate provision for the protection of young persons, and there is no need to deal with them, we suggest, under the present Bill. I am not going into any detail upon the matter, because it was sufficiently dealt with by the noble Earl, Lord Radnor, during the debate on the Second Reading. I would only add one consideration which he did not mention but which, as it seems to me, is of high importance. As one knows, there are no people more active than the trade unions of this country in protecting their members from any injurious conditions of labour, and I am entitled to say in this House that the trade unions connected with our railways would prefer that the young persons in railway employment should be excluded from this Bill in the same way as are the persons who are protected under the Factories Act and the Coal Mines Act. That, I think, should be sufficient at least to assure your Lordships that there would be no detriment to the young persons whom we now seek to exclude, if they were not included in this Bill. That is all I think I need say. I know that the Government are sufficiently impressed with the strength of the case, and are engaged in considering it, and if the noble Earl in charge of the Bill will give me an assurance that this matter is under sympathetic consideration I should be willing to withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 9, line 7, after ("1937") insert ("the Railways Act, 1921").—(Viscount Home of Slamannan.)

LORD ROCKLEY

May I say one or two words before the noble Earl, Lord Munster, replies? I have taken an interest in this matter for some time, and I have carefully read the speech of the noble Earl, Lord Radnor, on the Second Reading of this Bill. I have also made some further inquiry about the matter, and I understand that, as the noble Viscount has just stated, the trade union point of view is similar to the one which has been put before the Government by all the interests concerned, that it would very much interfere with the present arrangements in the railway world from every point of view if some such Amendment as the noble Viscount has suggested, or something having a similar effect, cannot be accepted by the Government. I much hope that the noble Earl, Lord Munster, will be able to say that the matter is under the very careful consideration of the Government and that something can be done on Report.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The Amendment which my noble friend Lord Home has moved is one that would exclude all railway employees from the Bill. I know that my right honourable friend appreciates to the full the special arrangements in force in the railway industry for securing the welfare of the employees, including the van boys, and he is certainly reluctant to do anything which would interfere unnecessarily with these arrangements. At the same time, I think I must point out that the young persons employed by the railway companies who would be excluded from the Bill by this Amendment are in fact being employed for substantially longer hours than the standards recently adopted and approved by Parliament in the Shops and Factories Acts, and any proposal for allowing these hours to continue without any statutory restriction must of course be open to considerable criticism. However, I know that my right honourable friend desires to reserve his final opinion on this subject pending the discussions and consultations which are, I understand, proceeding at the present time amongst the various parties and interests affected. In those circumstances I hope that the noble Viscount, Lord Home, will withdraw his Amendment and wait until the day is reached when these conversations are completed.

VISCOUNT HORNE OF SLAMANNAN

I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The next two Amendments in my name are drafting. I beg to move.

Amendments moved— Page 9, line 14, leave out ("to") and insert ("with respect to the employment of") Page 9, line 14, leave out ("by virtue of his employment").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

On Question, Whether Clause 10, as amended, shall stand part of the Bill?

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

It appears from paragraphs 53 and 54 of the Report of the Departmental Committee that a considerable number of young persons are employed as messengers in newspaper offices. The Committee found that although these boys do not work long hours they were employed late at night up to 2 and 3 a.m. and even in some cases up to 8 a.m. They also found that the work was almost entirely of a Mind alley character. In paragraph 111, the Committee felt unable to recommend an exception in respect of these young persons from the prohibition of night employment. The witnesses on behalf of the newspaper proprietors gave the Committee to understand that the prohibition of night work for juveniles and their substitution by persons over eighteen would not cause grave inconvenience to the newspaper trade and that the industry could adapt itself to the position. It is appreciated that the printing department of a newspaper office is a "factory," but an assurance is sought that young persons employed as messengers in newspaper offices, if they are not covered by the Factories Act, will come within the scope of this Bill, Clause 10 of which does not appear to cover them. I should be glad to know if the Government are satisfied on the point.

There is another small point I wish to raise. Your Lordships will notice that paragraph (d) in subsection (1) deals with employment at places of public entertainment or amusement or at a Turkish bath. I can see no reason why it should be confined to Turkish baths any more than to public baths. I shall be glad if the noble Earl could give me an answer to that question.

THE EARL OF LISTOWEL

There is one question that I should like to address to the noble Earl and possibly he will be able to answer it at a later stage. Does this clause cover waiters—young people in the sense of the Bill employed in semi-public restaurants at residential hotels? I am thinking of railway station hotels, which, of course, cater for travellers as well as for residents, but which do not come under the Shops Act because their restaurants are not public restaurants in the accepted sense. I should be very much obliged if the noble Earl could give me an answer to that question, because I was rather afraid in reading through the clause that these young people were not included.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

In reply to the noble Viscount, Lord Bertie of Thame, my right honourable friend was advised that these young persons employed in newspaper offices are, generally speaking, covered by Section 98 of the Factories Act, but there are apparently differences of opinion, and the matter may not be entirely free from doubt. In those circumstances, if my noble friend will bring forward an Amendment at the next stage of the Bill, I can promise him that it will receive most favourable consideration from His Majesty's Government. With regard to the reasons why a public bath was not inserted in paragraph (d) of this clause, I am advised that the definition of a public bath is the same as that of a place of public entertainment. If it should be found on re-examination that there is any doubt about that matter, I have no doubt an Amendment could be found which would meet the noble Lord's point. With regard to the question of the noble Earl opposite, I should like to consult my advisers again as to whether waiters in semi-public restaurants at residential hotels are in fact covered, and perhaps he would be good enough to raise the point at the next stage.

Clause 10, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 11 [Regulation of all employment by one employer]:

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The Amendments to this clause are all drafting or consequential, and I beg to move them en bloc.

Amendments moved— Page 9, line 18, leave out ("designated") and insert ("young") Page 9, line 20, after ("is") insert ("also") Page 9, line 22, after the second ("by") insert ("or under") Page 9, line 23, after ("section,") insert ("or employment").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause as amended, agreed to.

Clause 12 [Interpretation]:

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

My first Amendment to this clause is merely to define the word "agriculture". I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 9, line 27, at end insert ("'agriculture' has the same meaning as in the Agricultural Wages (Regulation) Act, 1924;").(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The next Amendment is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 9, line 29, leave out ("designated person") and insert ("young person to whom this Act applies").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

The next Amendment is also drafting. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 9, line 40, leave out ("'shop'").(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

There is a third drafting Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 10, line 14, leave out ("designated") and insert ("young").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER moved to insert. (5) Where a young person to whom this Act applies, who in any week is employed in connection with a business carried on at any premises and in that week is employed by the same employer in connection with a business carried on at other premises, works overtime, the overtime employment of that person shall be deemed to have taken place at the premises in connection with the business carried on at which he was mainly employed.

The noble Earl said: This Amendment has been put down because overtime may not be worked by young persons in any establishment for more than twelve weeks in any year. I think the words on the Paper make the matter quite clear, and I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 10, line 20, at end insert the said new subsection.—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 12, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 13 agreed to.

Clause 14 [Short title, commencement and extent]:

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

There is a drafting Amendment to this clause. I beg to move.

Amendment moved—

Page 11, line 29, at end insert: ("(2) The Shops Acts, 1912 to 1936, and Sections four and five of this Act may be cited together as the Shops Acts, 1912 to 1938.").—(The Earl of Munster.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 14, as amended, agreed to.

THE EARL OF MUNSTER

Perhaps it would be for the convenience of your Lordships if I mentioned now that we propose to take the Report stage of this Bill on June 30.