Mr Arthur Tiley: We can go into all these technical details in Committee. I suggest that when taxpayers' money is being handed out to a man who has done only two or three years' service it is a little different from the case of a man in normal industry. I hope that the House will have the confidence and courage quickly to pass the proposals of the Lawrence Committee. It was my Government, with the present...
Mr Arthur Tiley: I hope that we shall realise that the real question which the Lawrence Report deals with is not the problem of assessing our individual needs, but care for the future of this House of Commons, which still means so much in this turbulent world. I hope that we shall make sure that men and women of increasing ability can come here, from all walks of life, from different homes, and from all parts...
Mr Arthur Tiley: Will there be an opportunity before Christmas to discuss the Lawrence Report on Members' pay and pensions? Would it not be better to discuss this before we discuss hours of work?
Mr Arthur Tiley: As the Prime Minister has stated that general trade with South Africa is important and that there must be no general boycott, which is important because many of our industrial cities have large numbers of coloured immigrants who are dependent on trade with South Africa for their jobs—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Yes, I live amongst it—can the Prime Minister tell the House that the Wilson family...
Mr Arthur Tiley: May we be told what differences will be made? We are interested. We are very glad to hear of these improvements. May we be told what difference will be made in the National Assistance grants at the same time, because they run together?
Mr Arthur Tiley: Mr. Speaker, it is with great humility, pride and thankfulness that I am here in your presence to beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to provide that the savings of the people in any part of the National Savings movement shall not be used for the purpose of extending nationalisation or the State control of industry, without an Act of Parliament. The scenes which I have just...
Mr Arthur Tiley: I congratulate the hon. Member for Huddersfield, West (Mr. Wade) on having the ingenuity to be able to frame a Clause in such a way that it is selected for discussion by the Chair. This is a fundamental issue in the future of pensions legislation in this country, and it is very fitting that my right hon. Friend should be on the Front Bench waiting to reply to the debate because, although I...
Mr Arthur Tiley: Yes. I should think that an agreement could be achieved by consultation between both sides of industry and the trade unions on the way in which to deal with schemes which are already on our books. I would have been happier if the Clause had contained a provision which prevented a man withdrawing from a pension scheme and taking a cash payment. The whole idea behind the pension scheme,...
Mr Arthur Tiley: The hon. Member for Cardiff, South-West (Mr. Callaghan) is always a sport. He will enjoy the General Election, together with his adversary.
Mr Arthur Tiley: That is all very well, but that man will have lost a pension of £500 or £600 a year which he had paid for. It would have been there for him at 65. Now he will be "playing pop" because the National Assistance benefits are so low. That is the sort of thing that we must discourage. I want to see transferability, but I want to make sure that pensions are transferred, and not the right to...
Mr Arthur Tiley: Bradford, West.
Mr Arthur Tiley: The right county, anyway.
Mr Arthur Tiley: The hon. Member must bear in mind that he stepped out of the scheme of his own choice—
Mr Arthur Tiley: —and that he had the ability to choose to remain in, with the firm that he was then with, or to step out of pensioned employment.
Mr Arthur Tiley: I hope that Opposition Members will be speedily restored to the comfort which they deserve. I like to see the light shining in the dark places. It is a happy thing that: I am able to follow the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, Central (Sir B. Stross). I usually feel glad if he follows me, because if I drop I know that I am being followed by the medical adviser of the House and will receive...
Mr Arthur Tiley: I was glad that my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Dame Edith Pitt) dealt with some of the things that the hon. Member for St. Pancras, North (Mr. K. Robinson) said from the Opposition Front Bench. My hon. Friend said that after a decent lapse of time, she would make a decent speech. It was an excellent one. We must try to be here some time when my hon. Friend makes an...
Mr Arthur Tiley: That is not true. [HON. MEMBERS: "It is true."] It is not true. Only against certain important Amendments was there an overwhelming vote on this side. The party which I represent, and which I have represented for many years in the House of Commons, has spent many millions of £s on every aspect of the National Health Service which was created in 1948.
Mr Arthur Tiley: The hon. Member is helping to confirm my case. My party voted against reasoned Amendments and it voted for reasoned Amendments during the Committee stage of the Bill, but it has never been against the National Health Service, and the proof of our interest in it is to be seen in the increase in expenditure which there has been on all aspects of it since we came to power. I am not surprised...
Mr Arthur Tiley: I am sorry that the right hon. Gentleman's memory of those fateful years for the National Health Service is so wrong. Millions of millions of £s were necessary for medicines—
Mr Arthur Tiley: Yes, they were. Millions of £s more for spectacles and the dental service were needed than was anticipated. The opticians were working 23 and 24 hours a day. Taking 100 as the figure for spectacles provided, 60 people had two pairs. All that was miscalculated, and a great deal of the trouble which has ensued has arisen because the party opposite always gets its sums wrong. It is brilliant in...
