HC Deb 26 July 1934 vol 292 cc2149-51

Lords Amendment: In page 16, line 5, leave out from the beginning to "either" in line 12, and insert: (4) Within such period after the commencement of this section as the Minister may by, order determine, the council of every borough, urban district and county shall, after consultation with the chief officer of police and after giving public notice that they propose so to do, submit to the Minister either a scheme containing proposals for the establishment of crossings in the borough, or in the urban district, or in the rural districts in the county, as the case may be, or if it appears to them that the establishment of crossings in the borough, or in the urban district, or in any rural district in the county, as the case may be, is unnecessary, a statement of the reasons why they consider the establishment of crossings therein to be unnecessary, and in any case in which such a statement as aforesaid has been submitted the Minister may, if it appears to him that crossings ought to be established in the borough or district to which the statement relates and after giving to the council by whom the statement was submitted an opportunity of making representations, require the council to submit a scheme in relation thereto. (5) A scheme submitted under the last foregoing subsection shall specify.

Mr. SPEAKER

This Amendment raises a question of Privilege.

3.21 a.m.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA

I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

As the Bill originally stood, a scheme of crossings could be submitted by a local authority. This Amendment was inserted at the desire of the.Government and gives the Minister power to require the local authority to submit a scheme of pedestrian crossings. I attach the utmost importance to the Amendment, for, if the scheme is to be effective, it must be made universal and made universal as quickly as possible. I therefore hope that the House will agree to the Amendment and with the consequential one that affects London.

3.22 a.m.

Sir W. BRASS

I should like to congratulate the Minister on having put forward this Amendment. As a matter of fact, I had an Amendment down on the Order Paper on the Report stage which would have done the same thing, but it was out of Order because it would have created a charge. I think the Minister has done perfectly right to take these powers to force local authorities to put down these pedestrian crossings.

Question put, and agreed to—[with Special Entry].

Subsequent Lords Amendment, in page 16, line 38, agreed to.

Lords Amendment: In page 17, line 11, leave out Sub-section (9) and insert: () This section, in its application to the London Traffic Area constituted under the London Traffic Act, 1924, shall have effect subject to such adaptations as may be specified in an order made by the Minister. Any order made for the purposes of this subsection may be varied by a subsequent order and shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament as soon as may be after it is made, and shall not have effect until it has lain upon the Table of each House of Parliament for a period of not less than twenty-eight days during which the House has sat, and if either House during that period presents an Address to His Majesty praying that the order may be annulled, the order shall not come into force, but without prejudice to the making of a new order.

Mr. SPEAKER

I have to call the attention of the House to the fact that this Amendment raises a question of Privilege.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA

I beg to move, "That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

Sir W. BRASS

May we have an explanation of this Amendment?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA

It is consequential, because the provisions as regards London have to be quite different, and this is the nearest approach that we can make to deal with London on the same basis as other places.

Sir W. BRASS

I only asked for an explanation, because I moved to delete the same Clause in Committee and was refused by the Government.

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE-BRABAZON

Can we have an explanation of why this Clause is really necessary with regard to London, because we have been assured that the Minister had all the powers to make all the crossings that he desired. In fact, he has done so, and we have already seen in London some of the most complicated crossings in the whole world. Is he putting them down illegally? If not, why does he want these particular powers?

Mr. HORE-BELISHA

I now only !have powers of persuasion coupled with the powers of paying for the crossings when they are put down.

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE-BRABAZON

Does the Minister mean to tell us that all the crossings to-day have not been put down legally?

Question put, and agreed to [with Special Entry].

Subsequent Lords Amendments to page 17, line 29, agreed to.