Clause 92. — (Circumstances in Which Persons Carrying on Insurance Business of Certain Classes are to Be Taken as Not Carrying on Also Such Business of Other Classes.)

Orders of the Day — COMPANIES BILL [Lords] – in the House of Commons at 12:00 am on 19 July 1967.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mr Douglas Jay Mr Douglas Jay , Battersea North 12:00, 19 July 1967

I beg to move Amendment No. 264, in page 77, line 43, leave out subsection (2).

Amendments Nos. 264 and 266 have a threefold effect. First, they apply Clause 92, which we are now discussing to Section 11 of the Insurance Companies Act, 1958, so that in a case where a company which does not carry on longterm business intends to amalgamate with another company, the directors will not have to seek the sanction of a court merely because the company's property policies include incidental long-term cover against various personal accidents.

The second effect is to do what we have already done in other connections, to change the name of "life assurance business" to "ordinary long-term insurance business", which the hon. Gentlemen opposite agree was in conformity with the wishes of the insurance industry.

Thirdly, the effect is to move the subsection, following the change of phraseology, once again to its correct position in the alphabetical order of the insurance Clauses.

Photo of Mr John Temple Mr John Temple , City of Chester

Amendment No. 266 can be welcomed because it gives more flexibility. In modern circumstances, there may well be other kinds of insurance which can be incorporated with the main classification of insurance. But I am full of alarm at the enormous number of technical Amendments the Government are bringing in at this late stage. It does not give us confidence. I wonder what has been left behind. Only two days ago we got more starred Amendments. I wonder what would happen if we were to discuss the Bill further at another sitting. I wonder how many more Amendments the Government will dream up today that they cannot put down tomorrow.

Photo of Mr George Darling Mr George Darling , Sheffield, Hillsborough

This is a very good reason for getting rid of the Bill as quickly as possible.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: No. 265, in page 78, line 20, after 'insurance', insert 'business'.

No. 266, in page 78, line 24, at end Insert: () For the purposes of this Part of this Act and of sections 3, 5 and 11 of the principal Act, a person shall not be taken to carry on ordinary long-term insurance business by reason only of the incidental inclusion in a contract of insurance whose principal object is to insure a person against risks of a kind such that the business of effecting and carrying out contracts of insurance against them constitutes marine, aviation and transport insurance business, motor vehicle insurance, business or property insurance business, of provision whereby he assumes liability against the happening of personal accidents (whether fatal or not).

No. 267, in page 78, line 33, after 'in', insert 'section'.— [Mr. Jay.]