Mr Arthur Tiley: I am happy to be associated with and to follow the hon. Member for Bradford, South (Mr. George Craddock) in making a short speech in support of the two Orders in his presence and that of the hon. Member for Bradford, North (Mr. Ford) as well. I would say to my hon. Friend the Member for Reading (Mr. Peter Emery) that there is nothing as good as wool. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] I nearly...
Mr Arthur Tiley: I was only congratulating the Minister on the way in which he introduced the Order and referred to the wonderful industrial relations in this trade. I regret that I trod outside the narrow path. I do not think that successive Governments have appreciated the extent of the competition which the wool textile trade has had to face during the last 15 or 20 years, but we are still sixth in the...
Mr Arthur Tiley: The hon. Gentleman was not here when I made my speech, and I think that he has misunderstood me. It is a good thing now and again to let the heart rejoice about things that are right, be it in Bradford or anywhere else—that is what we have been trying to do for a few moments—and to get away from the great pressures of life. We have been enjoying ourselves, and have not been doing a...
Mr Arthur Tiley: My hon. Friend the Member for Shipley (Mr. Hirst) regretted that he had to leave, and asked me personally to apologise. He had a dinner engagement, and was coming back at ten o'clock.
Mr Arthur Tiley: The right hon. Lady says that the party opposite started from scratch, but that is not what hon. Members opposite were saying to the country at the time of the General Election. It was said then that the minimum income guarantee which would cover these cases was ready to be implemented immediately, as a first task.
Mr Arthur Tiley: I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time. As the right hon. Lady says, we are discussing some very interesting subjects. The purpose of this Clause is to bring into the Bill the whole army of the self-employed and to extend the scheme to cover them. I hope, therefore, that she will acquit me of the charge of the profit motive, because I am engaged now in extending her scheme and...
Mr Arthur Tiley: I am sure that I voice the opinion of my right hon. and hon. Friends when I say that we have had a very pleasant answer from a very pleasant Minister but not a convincing one. If nothing is forthcoming in answer to the points made by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Carshalton (Captain W. Elliot) and my hon. Friend the free lady from Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward), we shall have to...
Mr Arthur Tiley: It would be unfair for me to give the facts which I know personally from my own professional pursuit, but I know that many hundreds of thousands of small self-employed people are thriftily saving through pension arrangements created by the Conservative Government and through private endowment assurance. Many hundreds of thousands of small self-employed people are saving for their old age...
Mr Arthur Tiley: I beg to move Amendment No. 1. in page 2, line 25, at the end to add: (e) when the employer provides to the satisfaction of the Registrar of Non-Participating Employments a sickness benefit at least equal in value to the graduated benefit provided under this Act the contributions in paragraphs (c) and (d) above shall be reduced to 4¼ per cent. and ¼ per cent. by each of the employer and...
Mr Arthur Tiley: The Amendment stands in the names of my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds, North-East (Sir K. Joseph), my hon. Friend the Member for Somerset, North (Mr. Dean) and myself. It is with pleasure that we discuss Amendment No. 4 at the same time, Sir Samuel, as the Amendments are interrelated. We are glad to do this, because on this important social Measure we have no wish to waste time. We...
Mr Arthur Tiley: I felt that you would think that, Sir Samuel, and I am sorry that I have trespassed on your courtesy. Perhaps I shall be able to return to my argument when we come to the Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill". For the present, I will leave it.
Mr Arthur Tiley: Do not ask me a question now which Sir Samuel will not permit.
Mr Arthur Tiley: I quoted the column number in my earlier reference to the right hon. Lady's speech, and my later references were a continuation of it. The references were to columns 47 and 48 of 7th February, 1966. As I have said, we have put down these Amendments as probing Amendments, and we do not intend to divide the Committee on them. We hope that we shall have a healthy debate on the subject of...
Mr Arthur Tiley: I think that we have had a very interesting debate and that our purpose in moving this Amendment has been fulfilled. I therefore beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.
Mr Arthur Tiley: The right hon. Lady complained that my right hon. Friend the Member for Leeds, North-East (Sir K. Joseph) is always angry when he speaks from this Box. We know that she has a tiger in her tank; there is not much of her, but we know that she is there. It was a pity that we started the debate earlier this afternoon on the wrong foot. I do not wish to prolong that atmosphere, but when she...
Mr Arthur Tiley: I did not intend to develop it much further, Mr. Bowen, and I accept your rebuke. I was merely answering the charge which is constantly made about the smallness of the benefits provided under the graduated pension scheme. As I was saying, about £800 million has been collected—but that has already been paid out. Our old people have had that money in their pockets and have spent it. If the...
Mr Arthur Tiley: It is not my purpose to start a long discussion on this Clause because the Committee will have the privilege, with two new Clauses later, of debating the whole question of widows and we are not here to waste time. There are a few questions I wish to ask. Some are quite simple and others are about certain wording because this is a most unusual Clause. Three-quarters of it is absolutely ...
Mr Arthur Tiley: It is almost as difficult listening to the explanation as it is making it. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will be kind enough to clear up the other two points I made. The first concerns the case where the husband was away ill on the appointed day—in other words, where the claim is being paid on the old rate. Will the widow become entitled to related benefits?
Mr Arthur Tiley: I am trying to make certain that everybody is in benefit on the appointed day and that when there is an illness on the appointed day, a claim is not treated under the old Act so that the widow receives nothing. What I am trying to establish is that every person in insurable employment will be in benefit on the appointed day so that there will be no hardship cases arising because of the ruling...
Mr Arthur Tiley: The right hon. Gentleman has time to do his homework. Secondly, I was trying to establish that there were two separate benefits of 26 weeks each and that when a husband had been ill or unemployed for 20 weeks and then died, his widow would get a separate benefit of 26 weeks, in other words, that there would be two separate claims for two separate periods of 26 weeks.
