I would like to add a word, because there appears on the Paper in my name a Motion for the recommittal of the Bill. The notice was put on the Paper rather ex majori cautela. Some of my hon. Friends thought that there were several other disqualifications for election to a local authority which should be taken into account. I am not now disposed to move the Motion. Before a ruling be given on the point raised, I would like to read Standing Order No. 41— Upon the Report Stage of any Bill no Amendment may be proposed which could not have been proposed in Committee without an instruction from the House. I submit that Order carries with it the implication that while no Amendments might be proposed which could not have been proposed in Committee without instructions from the House, any Amendment which could have been proposed in Committee without such instruction is competent on the Report stage of the Bill. Surely it would be ridiculous that a Standing Committee which is only a portion of this House should be able to take some action which would narrow the power of this House in dealing with the Bill. The matter arises in this particular case because as introduced the Title of the Bill was A Bill to relieve members and chairmen of local authorities from disqualification for office. There are a number of statutory disqualifications but this Bill in point of fact only dealt with one, namely, disqualification on the ground of poor relief. The Title was amended and is now A Bill to relieve members and chairmen of local authorities from disqualification for office by reason of the receipt of medical or surgical relief. It is perfectly clear therefore that Amendments which might have been competent under the first title would not be competent under the second. It would be absurd if we were to take the line that this House is deprived of the right to do something on the Report stage by the action of some of its Members who happen to have been selected on the Committee.