HC Deb 06 March 1902 vol 104 cc572-3

Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."

Order for Second Reading read.

* MR. LOUIS SINCLAIR (Essex, Romford)

said he had given notice of a Motion to postpone the Second Reading of this Bill for six months. He had no personal interest in the matter, but it was one which affected his constituents and hence his action. The Bill violated one of the fundamental principles adopted by the House. In 1856 the West Ham Gas Company got permission from Parliament to supply various districts and vicinities thereof with gas. It had always been an accepted rule that gas, water, and other companies should strictly define the areas which they proposed to supply, and he wanted that done in the present instance. On behalf of Ilford and Barking he desired to get an assurance that the West Ham Company would not enter into competition with them, for they had already obtained from Parliament power to supply gas in their respective areas. The West Ham Company were proposing to raise capital to the extent of £600,000 or £800,000, and he feared he saw in that a threat of their intention to supply gas to Barking and Ilford. In fact they proposed to erect gas works within a few hundred yards of the Barking Company's Works. It might be suggested that now to insist on the insertion of a clause defining their area would lead to difficulties in regard to Standing Orders, but he would remind the House that the Standing Orders Committee was always willing to suspend Standing Orders in bonâ fide cases. The West Ham Pas Company, owing to the fact that they were near London, could get coal at a much cheaper rate than was possible at either Barking or Ilford, and could consequently supply gas at a lower price. But to allow them to enter into competition with Barking and Ilford under such circumstances would be most unfair. Those municipalities had already spent large sums on their undertakings, and they were of course under Parliamentary limitations as to their charges, &c. Having done good and excellent work at great expense, they ought not to be exposed to an unfair competition which would create conflicting interests, and which might cause great inconvenience to consumers. He begged to move as an Amendment, "That the Bill be read a second time this day six months."

The Amendment was not seconded.

Bill read a second time, and committed.