§ No stamp duty shall be chargeable on any instrument whereby any property or any estate or interest in any pictures, prints, books, manuscripts, works of art or scientific collections as appear to the Treasury to be of national, scientific, historic or artistic interest and such property is for national purposes transferred to or vested in any university or any county council or municipal corporation.—[Mr. Chanson.]
§ Brought up, and read the First time.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Sydney Irving)
With this new Clause the House may also discuss new Clause No. 38—"Exemption of charities from the payment of stamp duty on the purchase of property and mortgages."
§ Mr. Channon
This Clause deals with a smaller matter than betterment levy but still an important matter in regard to stamp duty. It is primarily designed to deal with an anomaly which has been drawn to my attention by my hon. Friend the Member for Wanstead and Woodford (Mr. Patrick Jenkin). I have seen a letter from the Financial Secretary to the Treasury dealing with this point. I will leave it to my hon. Friend the Member for Acton (Mr. Kenneth Baker) to deal with new Clause 38, should he be successful in catching the eye of the Chair.
As the law stands, stamp duty must be paid on documents such as share certificates required in relation to gifts intervivos. No stamp duty is payable on simple gifts of movable objects which do not require a document. Were I to give the Minister of State a picture or a collection of books, neither of us would have to pay stamp duty. If, on the other hand, I were to give him-—unlikely event—some I.C.I. shares, stamp duty would have to be paid.
Whenever appropriate, we ought to encourage gifts to universities and museums by public-spirited people, and when they are prepared to allow the fruits of their scholarship and knowledge, perhaps over 554 many years, to be shared by the nation, any barrier to such gifts must, prima facie, be a mistake. Many of our greatest national collections have been built up in that way.
If gifts have to be made in the form of a settlement, stamp duty is payable. However, a special concession was made in the Finance (1909–10) Act, 1910, which provided that in the case of certain conveyances or transfers, where the property was to be held, among other reasons,for the purposes of its preservation for the benefit of the nationstamp duty was remitted.There is, however, an extraordinary anomaly which arises in cases if this kind. I refer here to the case of a man known to Treasury Ministers—I shall not give his name, but the Financial Secretary has written about the matter to my hon. Friend—who made an extremely generous settlement of a magnificent collection of books worth a considerable sum of money. The major portion of the collection, going back to the 12th century, has been left to the British Museum. The remainder, of which the British Museum already had copies, are to go under the settlement to the new University of Ulster. All will agree that this is a most public-spirited gift which will be of great benefit to the institutions concerned and to the country. However, the donor has been advised that stamp duty is payable on the second gift to the University of Ulster. It is not payable in respect of that part of the settlement going to the British Museum.
The reason for the anomaly is that the University of Ulster is set up under Royal Charter, as most—if not all—universities are, whereas the British Museum is incorporated by Act of Parliament and is specifically exempt under Section 74 of the 1910 Act.
That distinction is now totally out of date. It is nonsense. How can it be justified that a settlement in favour of the British Museum is exempt from stamp duty whereas a settlement in favour of a new university is not?
The gift to which I have referred is a substantial one and the stamp duty is a considerable item. I have seen a letter from the University of Ulster—I know 555 that my hon. Friend the Member for Londonderry (Mr. Chichester-Clark) is concerned about the matter—confirming that members of the public will have access to this magnificent collection of books.
The case that they are being preserved for the benefit of the nation is amply proved. The university says in its letter thatmany of these books are unique, and all of them are very valuable",and it says at the same time that the public will have access to them.
The settlement has been made in consultation with the British Museum authorities, with the Friends of the National Libraries, and I understand that the Treasury Solicitor also was involved. This one case shows that the present law on the matter is archaic and must be changed. It must be changed in the interest of the universities themselves because the law as it stands must act as a disincentive to people who wish to make such gifts.
Accordingly, we propose by new Clause 9 to give the Treasury power—it is at the discretion of the Treasury—to say thatNo stamp duty shall be chargeable on any instrument whereby any property or any estate or interest in any pictures, prints, books, manuscripts, works of art or scientific collections as appear to the Treasuy to be of national, scientific, historic or artistic interest and such property is for national purposes transferred to or vested in any university …Any fair-minded person would say that that is wholly reasonable, and that the Treasury might consider making a concession. If it will not do it this year it might at any rate say that it will consider looking at the matter sympathetically in the future.
However, I have seen a letter of 15th July from the Financial Secretary to my hon. Friend the Member for Wanstead and Woodford, and I much regret that he says in it:I do not think it would be right to attempt a new definition of cases falling outside the charge in Section 74, which would inevitably move from the clear purpose of the present law in order to cover the kind of disposition which would ordinarily be outside the ambit of the stamp duty legislation, but which attracts liability because of the methods adopted in particular cases for making the disposition.556 The Treasury might go a bit further tonight. The change would not cost it any revenue. The law is totally indefensible; a clear anomaly exists. I have already put one clear case where it will make a substantial difference, and I am certain that others will arise.
I hope that the Treasury will reconsider the matter. The law is completely out of date. I am sure that some exemption of the kind I suggest will be allowed in time, and I hope that the Minister will say that he will give the matter favourable consideration, so that people will not be inhibited from making settlements in favour of the new universities, or bodies of this kind, which will attract stamp duty merely because of the anomaly that they are set up by Royal Charter and not an Act of Parliament.
The existing law is an out-of-date provision in a Finance Act of 50 years ago, passed when the sponsors no doubt had on their minds other matters than the wording of that Section. I beg the Minister to look at the anomaly again, and to give us a favourable answer tonight.
§ Mr. Kenneth Baker
New Clause 38 concerns the tax position of charities. Their tax position is very complicated, but by and large they do not pay taxes of any sort, though the statement should be heavily qualified. For example, they pay S.E.T., but get it back. On the whole, they are not liable to corporation tax or income tax, nor in most cases are they liable to capital gains tax. But I qualify all those statements because there are so many different types of charity.
One tax to which it is clear that they are liable is stamp duty, which is a tax on the transfer of capital assets. There are many charities springing up which buy houses and convert them, as Shelter does. They must pay stamp duty on the purchase of the house and on the negotiation of the mortgage. A case in my constituency brought this matter to my attention. There is a charitable society in Acton called the Abbeyfield Society, which buys Victorian houses and converts them, with money which it collects with great difficulty in my constituency and others, for elderly people who would otherwise be left high and dry in private rented accommodation. That is one of the greatest areas of housing suffering and shortage in this country.
557 This society 'has great difficulty in getting money together. It has just bought a house for £7,000 on which it has had to pay £70 stamp duty. It has also had to negotiate the mortgage with the local council. The Controller of Stamps insists that the mortgage be stamped at 10s. per cent. for £7,000. This is an anomaly under the 1967 Act. I do not believe that it was the intention of the Government in the 1967 Finance Act, or the intention of any previous Administration, to impose taxes of this sort upon charities of this kind.
'The extra amount involved in buying this house and converting it is something like £100. That, to a charity which has to equip the house with beds, bedding, carpets and chairs, is quite a lot of money. I hope that this narrow but important point will be sympathetically received by the Government. A lot of money cannot be involved here and we should not discourage any charitable effort, particularly that which is directed towards easing our housing problems.
Earl of Dalkeith (Edinburgh, North)
I want to support my hon. Friend the Member for Acton (Mr. Kenneth Baker) because there is in my constituency an organisation doing valuable work in housing elderly people. The cost to the Treasury of implementing the Amendment would be very small. Can the Minister tell us what loss of revenue would arise? The amount of good the Amendment will do is enormous.
§ Mr. John Smith
These two new Clauses do not go far enough. This is a most capricious and antiquated tax, only suited to primitive communities, such as we are rapidly becoming. It was introduced in 1694 as a temporary war-time tax—a phrase we have heard before. It is older than the window tax, older than the tax on liveried male servants, older than the tax on salt and older than the Inland Revenue itself. I remember recently the astonishment of an American company with which I had something to do, which purchased an English company. It received the document evidencing the purchase with no fewer than 43 stamps impressed on top of the wording varying in value from £50,000 to 4d.
I have paid a happy visit to the Stamp Duty Office, in the arches underneath 558 Somerset House. There can be found charming people operating the most charming old machines, and it seems a shame to bring anything so cosy to an end; but there is a difference between protecting the Revenue and protecting the jobs of those who are in the Revenue.
The tax has other disadvantages, which is why I want to widen these Clauses.
§ Mr. Smith
I had hoped that since this is a Second Reading debate I might broaden the new Clauses a little. Even as they stand it is not possible to tell how much this duty raises, since it can be paid through sticking postage stamps on documents. There are 350 separate relevant law cases dealing with stamp duty, and no consolidation has taken place for the last 77 years. I will refer briefly to how this affects banks. Nine million pounds is raised by counting 1,100 million separate pieces of paper each year.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman cannot debate the whole issue of stamp duty on these new Clauses.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
Order. If the hon. Gentleman keeps within the scope of the objects set out in the new Clauses he will be perfectly in order. He has been going much wider than that.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker
Is the hon. Gentleman saying that there are 171 different rates on the objects mentioned in the new Clauses? Unless he is, he is out of order.
§ 10.45 p.m.
§ Mr. Smith
Mr. Deputy Speaker, I have no wish to cross swords with you. New Clause 38 seeks to exempt charities from stamp duty, and they are, of course, 559 subject to stamp duty at present in the same way as are ordinary citizens on all transactions which normally attract stamp duty.
For example, there are 32 different categories of stamp duty on leases, the smallest of which raises 1s. and the largest only £12. Furthermore, the documents must be taken to the Stamp Office and one has to queue up to get the stamp put on.
Not unnaturally, the cost of raising this revenue, be it from objects of art or from charities, is very much higher proportionately than the cost of raising any other tax, and particularly high when it comes to repaying the tax on documents which have been wrongly stamped. One million pounds is repaid annually for documents which have been wrongly stamped, and it is mostly repaid in amounts of 2d.
The removal of stamp duty was advocated by the Bland Committee. The only person who has ever done anything about this barbaric tax, invented in the days when everybody was so slippery that pieces of paper were the only things that one could get hold of, and of which we should be ashamed, was Sir Stafford Cripps, who abolished the 1d. stamp duty on proxies. I hope that the time has now come when we can march forward from that point and abolish stamp duty on a much wider range of transactions.
§ The Minister of State, Treasury (Mr. Dick Taverne)
The new Clauses raise considerable difficulties, and it is not on grounds of cost that they are being resisted. I must tell the hon. Member for Edinburgh, North (Earl of Dalkeith) that I cannot say what the exact cost would be. It is the innate difficulties of the course proposed that lead me to advise the House to reject the two new Clauses.
I shall not follow the hon. Member for Cities of London and Westminster (Mr. John Smith) into his historical researches on the tax in general, but I shall turn first to new Clause 38, because this is the wider of the two new Clauses and entails looking at the nature of stamp duty and the reasons why we cannot follow the course suggested.
560 Stamp duties are taxes on documents, or on transactions to which the documents give effect, and are determined by the character and size of the transactions and not in general by the status of the parties who take part in the transactions. This is shown by the fact that relief is given for small transactions. For small transactions in certain classes of property no account is taken of whether the person who pays the tax is rich or poor. In this sense there is a division between taxes like income tax which have regard to the status of the payers and those like purchase tax and customs duty and, generally speaking, stamp duty, which look at the thing and disregard the circumstances and status.
The first objection to the wider new Clause which the hon. Member has promoted is that exactly the same kind of pressure for relief to look at status would inevitably be generated in taxes like purchase tax and customs duties.
Stamp duty on property means an addition to the price. The hon. Member is suggesting that charities should be in a more favourable position in acquiring property because they would be able to acquire it more cheaply than could their competitors, and charities are not generally regarded——
§ Mr. John Smith
But that was the case many years ago when the generality paid 2 per cent. and charities only 1 per cent. That will not wash.
§ Mr. Taverne
In 1947 there was a temporary exemption, when the rate became 2 per cent., and several courses were not open to trustees which are now open to them, and the position is different.
The hon. Gentleman says that the status of the parties is disregarded in the case of stamp duty but not in the case of income tax. In the case of charities generally, it would not be a desirable consequence if they could buy property more cheaply than could their competitors because they would not be subject to duty, but a more important objection is that the Clause ties it to the use to which the property would be put. It says:that property is to be used exclusively for a charitable purpose, or on any mortgages arranged on properties owned by Charities and used for charitable purposes.561 I am sure that the hon. Member for Acton (Mr. Kenneth Baker) will realise that it is an unsatisfactory basis for imposing stamp duty, as for purchase tax, if one has to have regard to the use to which the property may subsequently be put.
§ Mr. Kenneth Baker
The Clause was not an elaborate method of tax avoidance or duty avoidance and we tried to pin it down to the purposes for which a house was to be bought by charities and to prevent the sort of fringe charities dealing in property. It is intended to benefit only genuine charitable houses bought by charities for the needy. Surely the hon. and learned Member's arguments are unsatisfactory. Charities like these do not have competitors. They are not buying properties more cheaply than the rest of the market. This is an unsatisfactory case.
§ Mr. Taverne
There are two separate arguments. One does not want to put charities in a position where they can buy properties more cheaply than others.
The Clause suggests that one must have regard to the use to which a property is to be put and one would need to be sure it would be the use to which it will be put at the time the stamp duty becomes payable.
The other new Clause, in the name of the hon. Member for Southend, West (Mr. Channon), deals with a particular case of a settlement of a collection of books. As he pointed out, clearly this kind of object would not bear stamp duty usually, because it would be passing in a different way, without documents, and it was only because a settlement was involved and a gift passed, that stamp duty became payable. He puts it that there were anomalies in the case of a gift to the British Museum which is incorporated by special Act, and no stamp duty is payable, as it is in the case of a university.
The exceptions under the 1910 Act is very limited and is primarily concerned with the gift of land to the National Trust, or similar transactions. It so happens that the words were wide enough to cover the settlement of books on the British Museum. It is not so much an anomaly which arises for the settlement to the universities having to bear the 562 stamp duty; it is a rather fortuitous circumstance that the gift to the British Museum should come under the terms of Section 74 of the 1910 Act.
It may be asked: why not widen the exemption under Section 74 of the 1910 Act to include the kind of cases which have been put forward? But if this was done it would create a more serious anomaly than arises now. We would then say that there should be no such exemption for conveyances of property to charitable or public bodies, even if there might be an exemption from estate duty, but that there should be relief in the case of books or works of art where normally there would be no stamp duty payable because it would be done without a settlement. In this case the method of making the gift requires such an instrument. So we would have an anomaly in that there would be no relief if land or a house was given to a university, a public body of a charity, but there would be relief in the case of books and works of art. This would be legislation dealing with one particular case. I think that the House should always be cautious of legislating for one particular case. Looking at the general result, we would create a position which would be far more anomalous than that created by the limited exemption under Section 74 of the 1910 Act.
§ Mr. Robert Cooke
The reply on both the new Clauses has been, extraordinarily disappointing. The reasons given are not wholly convincing to me, and I know that I speak for my right hon. and hon. Friends on this side. I hope that, having shut the door this time, the Government will take note of what has been said and will see whether they can be more helpful in future.
My hon. Friend the Member for the Cities of London and Westminster (Mr. John Smith) told us of the anomalies in the stamp duty. The whole thing is absolutely riddled with anomalies. One can give away an estate worth £1 million over a 10s. stamp and it can be legal in certain circumstances. Yet, in other circumstances, one is caught in the biggest possible way.
Concerning new Clause 9, I was most disappointed that the Minister was unable to make any suggestion about how this difficulty could be got over. There must be other cases which will occur in 563 future where university libraries and similar collections will lose as a result of the anomaly. It is likely that collections will go abroad rather than be given to libraries here. They may indeed be broken up. That is another unhappy circumstance which could occur. There is a positive disincentive to form such collections in future.
We have tried to impress upon the Government before that the great collections which have been formed in the past are unlikely to go on being formed in future with all the difficulties which are put in their way.
It is significant that the right hon. Lady, the Lady Bountiful, the patron of the arts, the Minister in charge of the comparatively lavish patronage of the arts which the Government have gone in for, albeit in a sort of social service kind of way, should be present. I am sure that she is concerned about this difficulty that we are trying to get over. I hope that the fact that she is here means that she is not very happy about the situation and that she will press her right hon. and hon. Friends to accept the spirit of the new Clause.
There is definitely a loss to a learned body here and a loss to the public. The Minister has said that this difficulty cannot be got round on this occasion and it is no good legislating about a particular case. But perhaps a loophole can be found. Perhaps it can be sold for a nominal sum. Certainly it could be sold
§ to somebody else for a nominal sum and there would not be any question of stamp duty, but the university would get it
§ I remain unconvinced. The Government have not tried very hard. I hope that they will try harder in future.
§ Mr. Channon
I think that many hon. Members will be disappointed at the Government's reaction to these Clauses. My hon. Friend the Member for Acton (Mr. Kenneth Baker) referred to the Government's extraordinary attitude that this was desirable but administratively inconvenient. The Government's attitude to charities is astonishing.
The Minister argued that the British Museum should no longer have the right to acquire books or works of art without paying stamp duty. The anomaly was to be rectified by removing privileges given to the British Museum, rather than by enlarging them for the new universities. I cannot believe that the Government want people who make gifts of books to universities and institutions of learning to have to pay stamp duty on those books. It seems fantastic that the Government should wish to perpetuate this archaic and anomalous position, and I hope that my right hon. and hon. Friends will show that they are totally dissatisfied with the Minister's reply by taking the matter to a Division.
§ Question put, That the Clause be read a Second time:—
§ The House divided: Ayes, 195, Noes 241.567
|Division No. 330.]||AYES||[11.0 p.m.|
|Alison, Michael (Barkston Ash)||Brown, Sir Edward (Bath)||d'Avigdor-Goldsmid, Sir Henry|
|Allason, James (Hemel Hempstead)||Bruce-Gardyne, J.||Deedes, Rt. Hn. W. F. (Ashford)|
|Amery, Rt. Hn. Julian||Bryan, Paul||Dodds-Parker, Douglas|
|Astor, John||Buchanan-Smith, Alick (Angus, N&M)||Doughty, Charles|
|Atkins, Humphrey (M't'n & M'd'n)||Buck, Antony (Colchester)||du Cann, Rt. Hn. Edward|
|Awdry, Daniel||Bullus, Sir Eric||Elliot, Capt. Walter (Carshalton)|
|Baker, Kenneth (Acton)||Campbell, B. (Oldham, W.)||Elliott, R.W.(N'c'tle-upon.Tyne, N.)|
|Baker, W. H. K. (Banff)||Campbell, Gordon (Moray & Nairn)||Emery, Peter|
|Barber, Rt. Hn. Anthony||Carr, Rt. Hn. Robert||Eyre, Reginald|
|Beamish, Col. Sir Tufton||Channon, H. P. G.||Farr, John|
|Bell, Roxald||Chataway, Christopher||Fisher, Nigel|
|Bennett, Sir Frederic (Torquay)||Chichester-Clark, R.||Fletcher-Cooke, Charles|
|Bennett, Dr. Reginald (Gos. & Fhm)||Clark, Henry||Fortescue, Tim|
|Berry, Hn. Anthony||Clegg, Walter||Foster, Sir John|
|Bessell, Peter||Cooke, Robert||Fraser,Rt.Hn.Hugh(St'fford & Stone)|
|Biffen, John||Cooper-Key, Sir Neill||Galbraith, Hn. T. G.|
|Biggs-Davison, John||Corfield, F. V.||Gibson-Watt, David|
|Black, Sir Cyril||Costain, A. P.||Gilmour, Sir John (Fife, E.)|
|Boardman, Tom (Leicester, S.W.)||Crouch, David||Glover, Sir Douglas|
|Body, Richard||Cunningham, Sir Knox||Glyn, Sir Richard|
|Bossom, Sir Clive||Currie, G. B. H.||Godber, Rt. Hn. J. B.|
|Boyd-Carpenter, Rt. Hn. John||Dalkeith, Earl of||Goodhew, Victor|
|Boyle, Rt. Hn. Sir Edward||Dance, James||Gower, Raymond|
|Brinton, Sir Tatton||Davidson, James (Aberdeenshire, W.)||Grieve, Percy|
|Griffiths, Eldon (Bury St. Edmunds)||Maude, Angus||Scott-Hopkins, James|
|Crimond, Rt. Hn. J.||Mawby, Ray||Sharples, Richard|
|Curden, Harold||Maxwell-Hyslop, R. J.||Shaw, Michael (Sc'b'gh & Whitby)|
|Hall, John (Wycombe)||Mills, Peter (Torrington)||Silvester, Frederick|
|Hall-Davis, A. G. F.||Mills, Stratton (Belfast, N.)||Sinclair, Sir George|
|Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury)||Miscampbell, Norman||Smith, Dudley (W 'wick & L'mington)|
|Harrison, Brian (Maldor.)||Mitchell, David (Basingstoke)||Smith, John (London & W 'minster)|
|Harvey, Sir Arthur Vere||Montgomery, Fergus||Speed, Keith|
|Harvie Anderson, Miss||Morgan-Giles, Rear-Adm.||Stainton, Keith|
|Hawkins, Paul||Morrison, Charles (Devizes)||Steel, David (Roxburgh)|
|Hay, John||Munro-Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh||Stodart, Anthony|
|Heseltine, Michael||Murton, Oscar||Stoddart-Scott Col. Sir M.|
|Higgins, Terence L.||Nabarro, Sir Gerald||Tapsell, Peter|
|Hiley, Joseph||Neave, Airey||Taylor,Edward M.(G'gow,Cathcart)|
|Hill, J. E. B.||Noble, Rt. Hn. Michael||Temple, John M.|
|Holland, Philip||Nott, John||Thatcher, Mrs Margaret|
|Hordern, Peter||Onslow, Cranley||Tilney, John|
|Hornby, Richard||Orr, Capt. L. P. S.||Turton, Rt. Hn. R. H.|
|Howell, David (Guildford)||Page, Graham (Crosby)||van Straubenzee, W. R.|
|Hunt, John||Page, John (Harrow, W.)||Vickers, Dame Joan|
|Hutchison, Michael Clark||Pardoe, John||Waddington, David|
|Iremonger, T. L,||Pearson, Sir Frank (Clitheroe)||Wainwright, Richard (Colne Valley)|
|Jenkin, Patrick (Woodford)||Peel, John||Walker, Peter (Worcester)|
|Jopling, Michael||Percival, Ian||Walker-Smith, Rt. Hn. Sir Derek|
|Joseph, Rt. Hn. Sir Keith||Pike, Miss Mervyn||Walters, Dennis|
|Kerby, Capt. Henry||Pink, R. Bonner||Ward, Dame Irene|
|Kershaw, Anthony||Pounder, Rafton||Weatherill, Bernard|
|King, Evelyn (Dorset, S.)||Powell, Rt. Hn. J. Enoch||Wells, John (Maidstone)|
|Kirk, Peter||Price, David (Eastleigh)||Whitelaw, Rt. Hn. William|
|Kitson, Timothy||Prior, J. M. L.||Wiggin, A. W.|
|Lancaster, Col. C. G.||Pym, Francis||Williams, Donald (Dudley)|
|Legge-Bourke, Sir Harry||Quennell, Miss J. M.||Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)|
|Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland)||Ramsden, Rt. Hn. James||Winstanley, Dr M. P.|
|McAdden, Sir Stephen||Rawlinson, Rt. Hn. Sir Peter||Wolrige-Gordon, Patrick|
|MacArthur, Ian||Rees-Davies, W. R.||Wood, Rt. Hn. Richard|
|Maclean, Sir Fitzroy||Rhys Williams, Sir Brandon||Woodnutt, Mark|
|Macleod, Rt. Hn. Iain||Ridsdale, Julian||Worsley, Marcus|
|McNair-Wilson, Michael||Rossi, Hugh (Hornsey)||Younger, Hn. George|
|McNair-Wilson, Patrick (New Forest)||Royle, Anthony||TELLERS FOR THE AYES|
|Maddan, Martin||Russell, Sir Ronald||Mr. Jasper More add Mr. Anthony Grant.|
|Maginnis, John E.||St. John-Stevas, Norman|
|Marples, Rt. Hn. Ernest||Scott, Nicholas|
|Albu, Austen||Davies, G. Elfed (Rhondda, E.)||Gardner, Tony|
|Allaun, Frank (Salford, E.)||Davies, Dr. Ernest (Stretford)||Garrett, W. E.|
|Alldritt, Walter||Davies, Rt. Hn. Harold (Leek)||Gray, Dr. Hugh (Yarmouth)|
|Anderson, Donald||Davies, Ifor (Gower)||Gregory, Arnold|
|Armstrong, Ernest||de Freitas, Rt. Hn. Sir Geoffrey||Grey, Charles (Durham)|
|Ashley, Jack||Delargy, Hugh||Griffiths, David (Rother Valley)|
|Ashton, Joe (Bassetlaw)||Dell, Edmund||Griffiths, Eddie (Brightside)|
|Atkinson, Norman (Tottenham)||Dempsey, James||Griffiths, Will (Exchange)|
|Barnett, Joel||Dewar, Donald||Hamilton, James (Bothwell)|
|Beaney, Alan||Diamond, fit. Hn. John||Hamilton, William (Fife, W.)|
|Bence, Cyril||Dickens, James||Hamling, William|
|Benn, Rt. Hn. Anthony Wedgwood||Dobson, Ray||Hannan, William|
|Bidwell, Sydney||Doig, Peter||Harper, Joseph|
|Binns, John||Driberg, Tom||Harrison, Walter (Wakefield)|
|Bishop, E. S.||Dunn, James A.||Hart, Rt. Hn. Judith|
|Boardman, H. (Leigh)||Dunwoody, Mrs. Gwyneth (Exeter)||Haseldine, Norman|
|Booth, Albert||Dunwoody, Dr. John (F'th & C'b'e)||Hattersley, Roy|
|Bottomley, Rt. Hn. Arthur||Eadie, Alex||Hazell, Bert|
|Boyclen, James||Edelman, Maurice||Heffer, Eric S.|
|Bray, Dr. Jeremy||Edwards, Robert (Bilston)||Henig, Stanley|
|Brown, Hugh D. (G'gow, Provan)||Edwards, William (Merioneth)||Hilton, W. S.|
|Brown,Bob(N'c'tte-upon-Tyne,W.)||Ellis, John||Hooley, Frank|
|Brown, R. W. (Shoreditch & F'bury)||English, Michael||Houghton, Rt. Hn. Douglas|
|Buchan, Norman||Ennals, David||Howarth, Robert (Bolton, E.)|
|Buchanan, Richard (G'gow, Sp'burn)||Ensor, David||Howie, W.|
|Butler, Herbert (Hackney, C.)||Evans, Fred (Caerphilly)||Hoy, Rt. Hn. James|
|Butler, Mrs. Joyce (Wood Green)||Evans, Ioan L, (Birm'h'm, Yardley)||Hughes, Rt. Hn, Cledwyn (Anglesey)|
|Cant, R. B.||Faulds, Andrew||Hughes, Roy (Newport)|
|Carmichael, Neil||Fernyhough, E.||Hunter, Adam|
|Carter-Jones, Lewis||Finch, Harold||Irvine, Sir Arthur (Edge Hill)|
|Concannon, J. D.||Fletcher, Ted (Darlington)||Jackson, Colin (B'h'se & Spenb'gh)|
|Conlan, Bernard||Foley, Maurice||Jackson, Peter M. (High Peak)|
|Crawshaw, Richard||Foot, Michael (Ebbw Vale)||Jay, Rt. Hn. Douglas|
|Cronin, John||Forrester, John||Jeger,Mrs.Lena(H'b'n&St.P'cras,S.)|
|Crosland, Rt. Hn. Anthony||Fowler, Gerry||Jenkins, Hugh (Putney)|
|Dalyell, Tam||Fraser, John (Norwood)||Jenkins, Rt. Hn. Roy (Stechford)|
|Davidson, Arthur (Accrington)||Freeson, Reginald||Johnson,Carol (Lewisham, S.)|
|Davies, Ednyfed Hudson (Conway)||Galpern, Sir Myer||Johnson, James (K'ston-on-Hull, W.)|
|Jones, Rt. Hn. Sir Elwyn(W. Ham,[...].)||Moonman, Eric||Rodgers, William (Stockton)|
|Jones, J. Idwal (Wrexham)||Morgan, Elystan (Cardiganshire)||Ross, Rt. Hn. William|
|Jones, T. Alec (Rhondda, w[...])||Morris, Alfred (Wythenshawe)||Shaw, Arnold (Ilford, S.)|
|Judd, Frank||Morris, Charles R. (Openshaw)||Sheldon, Robert|
|Kelley, Richard||Morris, John (Aberavon)||Shore, Rt. Hn. Peter (Stepney)|
|Kenyon, Clifford||Moyle, Roland||Short, Rt. Hn.Edward(N'c'Ne-u-Tyne)|
|Kerr, Mrs. Anne (R'ter & Chatham)||Mulley, Rt. Hn. Frederick||Silkin, Rt. Hn. John (Deptford)|
|Kerr, Russell (Feltham)||Murray, Albert||Silkin, Hn. S. C. (Dutwich)|
|Lawson, George||Neal, Harold||Silverman, Julius|
|Leadbitter, Ted||Newens, Stan||Slater, Joseph|
|Lee, Rt. Hn. Frederick (Newton)||Oakes, Gordon||Small, William|
|Lee, Rt. Hn. Jennie (Cannock)||Ogden, Eric||Spriggs, Leslie|
|Lee, John (Reading)||O'Malley, Brian||Summerskill, Hn. Dr. Shirley|
|Lever, Rt. Hn. Harold (Cheetham)||Oram, Albert E.||Taverne, Dick|
|Lewis, Arthur (W. Ham, N.)||Orbach, Maurice||Thomas, Rt. Hn. George|
|Lewis, Ron (Carlisle)||Orme, Stanley||Thomson, Rt. Hn. George|
|Lomas, Kenneth||Oswald, Thomas||Tinn, James|
|Loughlin, Charles||Owen, Dr. David (Plymouth, S'tn)||Urwin, T. W.|
|Luard, Evan||Owen, Will (Morpeth)||Varley, Eric G.|
|Mabon, Dr. J. Dickson||Page, Derek (King's Lynn)||Wainwright, Edwin (Dearne Valley)|
|McCann, John||Palmer, Arthur||Walker, Harold (Doncaster)|
|MacColl, James||Pannell, Rt. Hn. Charles||Wallace, George|
|Macdonald, A. H.||Park, Trevor||Watkins, David (Consett)|
|McGuire, Michael||Parker, John (Dagenham)||Watkins, Tudor (Brecon & Radnor)|
|McKay, Mrs. Margaret||Parkyn, Brian (Bedford)||Weitzman, David|
|Mackenzie Gregor (Rutherglen)||Pavitt, Laurence||Wellbeloved, James|
|Mackintosh, John P.||Pearson, Arthur (Pontypridd)||Wells, William (Walsall, N.)|
|Maclennan, Robert||Pentland, Norman||Whitaker, Ben|
|McMillan, Tom (Glasgow, C.)||Perry, Ernest G. (Battersea, S.)||Whitlock, William|
|McNamara, J. Kevin||Perry, George H. (Nottingham, S.)||Willey, Rt. Hn. Frederick|
|Mahon, Peter (Preston, S.)||Prentice, Rt. Hn. Reg||Williams, Alan (Swansea, W.)|
|Mahon, Simon (Bootle)||Price, Christopher (Perry Barr)||Williams, Alan Lee (Hornchurch)|
|Mallalieu,J.P.W.(Huddersfield,E.)||Price, Thomas (Westhoughton)||Williams, Clifford (Abertillerv)|
|Manuel, Archie||Price, William (Rugby)||Williams, Mrs. Shirley (Hitchin)|
|Mapp, Charles||Probert, Arthur||Willis, Rt. Hn. George|
|Marquand, David||Rankin, John||Wilson, William (Coventry, S.)|
|Mason, Rt. Hn. Roy||Rees, Merlyn||Winnick, David|
|Mellish, Rt. Hn. Robert||Richard, Ivor||Woodbum, Rt. Hn. A.|
|Mendelson, John||Roberts, Albert (Normanton)||Woof, Robert|
|Mikardo, Ian||Roberts, Rt. Hn. Goronwy||TELLERS FOR THE NOES:|
|Miller, Dr. M. S.||Roberts, Gwilym (Bedfordshire, S.)||Mr. Alan Fitch and Mr. Neil McBride.|
|Milne, Edward (Blyth)||Robertson, John (Paisley)|
|Mitchell, R. C. (S'th'pton, Test)||Robinson, Rt.Hn. Kenneth (St.P'c'as)|
§ Further consideration of the Bill, as amended, adjourned.—[Mr. Roy Jenkins.]568
§ Bill, as amended, to be further considered Tomorrow.