Results 1–20 of 792 for speaker:Sir Hugh Linstead

Palace of Westminster (13 Jul 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: I listened with a great deal of sympathy to what was said by the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, Central (Sir B. Stross). I am very much in agreement with the spirit behind the hon. Gentleman's speech. I shall, however, find it necessary to disagree with him about his proposal for some form of international architectural competition as one way of solving the architectural difficulties with...

Palace of Westminster (13 Jul 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: Yes. I think that at a certain stage the House should take such a decision, but I do not think that it should take that decision ahead of having seen a solution proposed by a competent and imaginative architect as being in his view the best solution to the problem. I should be prepared to put rather more faith in an architect and less faith in a committee than perhaps the House would like,...

Palace of Westminster (13 Jul 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: That would decide in advance the fact that we were to solve the problem in a particular way. I am not sure that we want to take even that step until we have a first-class architect, who must be selected, must live with the users of the building for a time and then produce one, or possibly more than one, solution which can be submitted to the choice of the House. I wish to refer to the...

Palace of Westminster (13 Jul 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: Even when a contiguous building was contemplated it was still suggested that library services should be hived off from the main Library into the building in Bridge Street.

Palace of Westminster (13 Jul 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: My criticism is that by doing that one would be dividing the Library. I have been pointing out that great advantage is to be gained from concentrating the facilities of the Library in one place, rather than building up a daughter library in a separate wing of this building. The main point in deciding the physical needs of the Library is whether it needs to expand and, if it does, should it...

Palace of Westminster (13 Jul 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: Provided you will turn a deaf ear to what I am going to say, since it goes beyond the question of accommodation, Mr. Speaker, I would like to comment on the hon. Member's question. It is true that the Library Committee has made an application for the appointment of two additional library clerks with science degrees to help hon. Members with research and scientific problems. I am happy to say...

Palace of Westminster (13 Jul 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: I thank the hon. Member for Barking (Mr. Driberg) for his courteous references to my speech, but my criticism was not of a committee as a means of choosing an architect. We are bound to need a committee to choose an architect—I do not see how else we can choose him. My criticism was that if a committee begins to decide on architectural features, such as Gothic, and the like, one has a...

Business of the House ( 9 Jul 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: My right hon. and learned Friend will, no doubt, have been on the Order Paper the Motion signed by hon. Members on both sides asking for the appointment of a Select Committee of the House to inquire into the future organisation and development of the Library. Can my right hon. and learned Friend tell us what possibility there is of the House being able to express an opinion on the Motion?

Parliamentary Procedure (Committee) ( 8 Jul 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: It is Question Time now.

Orders of the Day — Drugs (Prevention of Misuse) Bill: Clause 1. — (Penalization of Unauthorised Possession of Scheduled Substances.) (22 Jun 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: I am glad that my hon. Friend the Member for Bedfordshire, South (Mr. Cole) has raised this point and I am sure that the solution he is content with is the right one—namely, that, in this particular case, a decision of the manufacturer should be accepted in preference to putting some power into the hands of the Home Secretary to be used in extreme cases if other manufacturers should prove...

Orders of the Day — Drugs (Prevention of Misuse) Bill: Clause 1. — (Penalization of Unauthorised Possession of Scheduled Substances.) (22 Jun 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: I would not disagree. What is needed is some attempt at standardisation so that we do not have two tablets of the same colour and shape but of very different composition being easily mistaken one for the other simply because the physical characteristics happen to be the same. We should regard the Bill as a satisfactory temporary solution for our purpose, but it is an indication of the need...

Orders of the Day — Resale Prices Bill: Clause 5. — (Power of Court to Exempt Classes of Goods.) (23 Apr 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: I have extreme sympathy with the Amendment and with what is sought to be secured by it, but I am bound to say that share a little the difficulty which my hon. Friend the Member for Ormskirk (Sir D. Glover) expressed. It seems to me that what the Amendment seeks to remedy goes to the basis of the Bill and that it is a fundamental Second Reading point. The Bill might very well threaten serious...

Orders of the Day — Resale Prices Bill: Clause 5. — (Power of Court to Exempt Classes of Goods.) (23 Apr 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: I was coming to precisely that point. If the general situation is as I have described it, and if this is inherent in the Bill, and if my right hon. Friend can find no way by which something can be put into the Clause to achieve the objective of the Amendment, then, as my hon. Friend the Member for Crosby (Mr. Graham Page) said, we must look at the right of representation before the Court not...

Orders of the Day — Resale Prices Bill: Clause 5. — (Power of Court to Exempt Classes of Goods.) (23 Apr 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: There will undoubtedly be an identity of interest between a manufacturer who makes an application and various people who are working in the industry concerned with those goods. It may very well be extremely valuable that the people working in the industry shall have the opportunity of being heard before the Court. I am not myself abandoning all hope, until I have heard my right hon. Friend...

Orders of the Day — Resale Prices Bill: Clause 5. — (Power of Court to Exempt Classes of Goods.) (23 Apr 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: I do not want to appear to be taking a strongly differing point of view from that of the hon. Lady. I merely point out that under subsection (2,b) and (2,c) there are items in the gateways which are of substantial interest to the owners of businesses—to independent retailers—and those employed by them. It may well be extremely important to those two classes that they should be able to be...

Resale Prices Bill (23 Apr 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: I support the proposal in the Amendment, which raises a point very similar to an Amendment I moved at the beginning of discussion of Clause 5. I sought in that Amendment to ensure that the Court had the right to select certain groups of goods out of the class and to declare that those groups might have the benefit of an exemption even if the whole class in respect of which an application was...

Resale Prices Bill (22 Apr 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: I beg to move Amendment No. 204, in page 5, line 15, at the end, to insert: (c) the goods would be sold by retail under conditions likely to cause danger to health in consequence of their misuse by the public as such consumers or users or. This Amendment would provide an additional gateway. In view of the lateness of the hour, I do not propose to discuss the matter at length. The case for a...

Resale Prices Bill (22 Apr 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: There are two observations that I should like to make in reply to that very brief speech. The first point relates to advising the hon. Gentleman to take something other than what he asks for. I suspect that the hon. Gentleman gets just what he asks for. If he ask for aspirins, he gets them. If he asks for a proprietary brand of aspirins, he get that, too. That seems a sensible way of dealing...

Resale Prices Bill: Clause 4. — (Civil Remedies for Breach of Restrictions.) (21 Apr 1964)

Sir Hugh Linstead: I should like to ask my right hon. Friend a ques- tion about subsection (4,a) and the reason for its inclusion in the Clause. I can understand why the plaintiff in an action, before the onus shifts, should be required to prove that supplies of goods have been withheld and possibly that before they were withheld the supplier had been doing business with the dealer. It is reasonable that the...


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>

Create an alert

Advanced search

Find this exact word or phrase

You can also do this from the main search box by putting exact words in quotes: like "cycling" or "hutton report"

By default, we show words related to your search term, like “cycle” and “cycles” in a search for cycling. Putting the word in quotes, like "cycling", will stop this.

Excluding these words

You can also do this from the main search box by putting a minus sign before words you don’t want: like hunting -fox

We also support a bunch of boolean search modifiers, like AND and NEAR, for precise searching.

Date range

to

You can give a start date, an end date, or both to restrict results to a particular date range. A missing end date implies the current date, and a missing start date implies the oldest date we have in the system. Dates can be entered in any format you wish, e.g. 3rd March 2007 or 17/10/1989

Person

Enter a name here to restrict results to contributions only by that person.

Section

Restrict results to a particular parliament or assembly that we cover (e.g. the Scottish Parliament), or a particular type of data within an institution, such as Commons Written Answers.

Column

If you know the actual Hansard column number of the information you are interested in (perhaps you’re looking up a paper reference), you can restrict results to that; you can also use column:123 in the main search box.