Results 1–20 of 92 for speaker:Mr William Roots

Orders of the Day — Housing Subsidies Bill: New Clause 3. — (Fair Local Authority Rents.) (8 Mar 1967)

Mr William Roots: We have now reached the point at which everyone is agreed, first, that a provision such as this is clearly fair and, secondly, that it is entirely in accordance with the Government's White Paper. As far as I could gather from the remarks of the hon. Member for Birmingham, Aston (Mr. Julius Silverman), he was entirely in favour of the scheme which operates in Birmingham. I come to the...

Orders of the Day — Housing Subsidies Bill: New Clause 3. — (Fair Local Authority Rents.) (8 Mar 1967)

Mr William Roots: Could the Parliamentary Secretary tell us what wording he would like instead of "economic rent"?

Orders of the Day — Tourist Trade Facility Bill (3 Mar 1967)

Mr William Roots: I wish only to emphasise some of the points that have been made. This is referred to as a tourist industry Measure. I should have thought that it would be more correct to refer to it as an Expropriation of Hyde Park Measure. In considering the use to which the parks should be put, I would confine myself to the only park which borders on my constituency, Hyde Park. I do not know where it...

Orders of the Day — GREATER LONDON COUNCIL (GENERAL POWERS) (No. 2) BILL (By Order) (23 Feb 1967)

Mr William Roots: I beg to move, to leave out "now" and at the end of the Question to add, "upon this day six months". The explanation of the Bill's provisions given by the hon. and learned Member for Dulwich (Mr. S. C. Silkin) has not entirely satisfied me, at least, and it has raised a number of problems over which the hon. and learned Gentleman skated rather quickly. For example, Clause 5 provides for the...

Orders of the Day — GREATER LONDON COUNCIL (GENERAL POWERS) (No. 2) BILL (By Order) (23 Feb 1967)

Mr William Roots: That is what was very much in my mind. At best, there seems no purpose in the provision; at worst, it seems a provision for something which, so far as this House has been told, does not exist. I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. Subsequent speakers may elaborate the point, but at present I fail to see why we should give a retrospective effect to the provision. In Clause 18 it is most...

Orders of the Day — GREATER LONDON COUNCIL (GENERAL POWERS) (No. 2) BILL (By Order) (23 Feb 1967)

Mr William Roots: This Clause deals with specific cases of acquisition of land. It must be known whether land has been acquired.

Orders of the Day — GREATER LONDON COUNCIL (GENERAL POWERS) (No. 2) BILL (By Order) (23 Feb 1967)

Mr William Roots: The period which has elapsed is two years. But the Council is seeking a further four years in addition to the two years. It seems a curious extension.

Orders of the Day — Parliamentary Commissioner Bill: Clause 3. — (Administrative Provisions.) (24 Jan 1967)

Mr William Roots: I am grateful to the Financial Secretary for the Amendments. There was considerable discussion of these matters in Committee, when a number of my hon. Friends were unhappy about the wording of the various Clauses. I hope and believe that the Amendments meet the points which we raised in Committee and I do not oppose them.

Orders of the Day — Parliamentary Commissioner Bill: Clause 5. — (Matters Subject to Investigation.) (24 Jan 1967)

Mr William Roots: The Leader of the House claims certain credit for the Amendment and certainly one rives him credit for bringing it forward. But it will perhaps be known to the House—as he hinted—that the absence of any such power had caused great concern among the Opposition Members of the Standing Committee. He chose to twit us with, first of all, a disbelief in the principle of the ombudsman and what...

Orders of the Day — Schedule 2. — (Departments and Auth- Orities Subject to Investigation.) (24 Jan 1967)

Mr William Roots: I beg to move Amendment No. 32, in page 11, line 36, at the end to insert 'Land Commission'. I can deal with the Amendment very shortly. In Committee the Financial Secretary undertook to deal with this matter. I have put down the Amendment to enable him to do so.

Orders of the Day — Schedule 2. — (Departments and Auth- Orities Subject to Investigation.) (24 Jan 1967)

Mr William Roots: I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Orders of the Day — Schedule 3. — (Matters Not Subject to Investigation.) (24 Jan 1967)

Mr William Roots: I beg to move Amendment No. 33, in page 13, line 4, at the end to insert: 'unless such action affects the legal rights or status of a citizen of the United Kingdom'. In Committe the Financial Secretary had pressed upon him at some length the deficiency in this paragraph of the Schedule. He said that he would consider a form of words which would enable, in particular—as an example—action...

Orders of the Day — Schedule 3. — (Matters Not Subject to Investigation.) (24 Jan 1967)

Mr William Roots: The fact that the Government have decided to move this Amendment to exclude from investigation the regional hospital boards and the other bodies mentioned will, I know, give a great deal of disappointment. Certainly it disappoints me. Since the Committee proceedings were reported I have had a number of letters from people all over the country wanting to have matters which were not entirely...

Orders of the Day — Schedule 3. — (Matters Not Subject to Investigation.) (24 Jan 1967)

Mr William Roots: I had understood the Lord President to envisage—and I should have thought it was the only way to envisage it—an ombudsman for the various hospital and medical services. I do not see how a Civil Service ombudsman could come to a conclusion on a clinical decision. I should have thought that, for all time, clinical decisions were highly unsuitable for investigation by any ombudsman, whether...

Orders of the Day — London Government Bill (13 Dec 1966)

Mr William Roots: I expect that the House, like myself, was somewhat blinded by that burst of clarity of thought with which the hon. Member for Orpington (Mr. Lubbock) realised that the Royal Borough of Kingston-upon-Thames was comprised of people, but some hon. Members may have been surprised that he could find no point of principle in the Bill. I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman has left the Chamber. I...

Orders of the Day — London Government Bill: Clause 1. — (London Borough Elections.) (5 Dec 1966)

Mr William Roots: I beg to move Amendment No. 17, in page 1, line 28, at end add: (5) This section shall not apply to the London Borough of Kensington and Chelsea.

Orders of the Day — London Government Bill: Clause 1. — (London Borough Elections.) (5 Dec 1966)

Mr William Roots: The Committee will not have failed to realise that this Amendment refers specifically—and it is the only one referring specifically—to an inner London borough. No doubt that was why, in selecting it, Sir Eric, you selected also Clause 5 relating to the educational provision. In the light of what has been said, I do not intend to indulge in repetition. The inner boroughs of Kensington...

Orders of the Day — London Government Bill: Clause 1. — (London Borough Elections.) (29 Nov 1966)

Mr William Roots: I wish to address the Committee on the first Amendment. I am not entirely convinced that the case for an alteration in the provisions of the London Government Act, 1963, has been proved, but the House of Commons gave a Second Reading to this Bill and, therefore, we should proceed on that basis. The fundamental point is, and should be, whether we should lightly, or at all, grant an extension...

Orders of the Day — London Government Bill: Clause 1. — (London Borough Elections.) (29 Nov 1966)

Mr William Roots: The hon. and learned Gentleman is not very quick to allow interventions. I will give way to him later. That is the first objective, that the idea is to hang on to power in the boroughs for as long as possible. I should think that that strikes the Committee as very wrong. Let us consider the matters on which, on the lest put forward by the hon. and learned Member for Stoke Newington and...

Orders of the Day — London Government Bill: Clause 1. — (London Borough Elections.) (29 Nov 1966)

Mr William Roots: I have already said that I consider that the London Government Act of 1963 had not proved a failure, but the House has given this Bill a Second Reading, and if there is to be a change it would have been far easier to have put back the G.L.C. elections. The strongest reason would have been that it is not a body which is nearly so closely concerned as the borough councils are with the...


1 2 3 4 5 > >>

Create an alert

Did you find what you were looking for?

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.