§ Any land acquired or leased fur allotments under this Act, the Act of 1892, or the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1894, or occupied as allotments at the date of the passing of this Act (except ground in public parks, gardens pertainine- to a residence, or in ground pertaining to a railway or industrial works, and ground occupied as allotments temporarily under Section sixteen hereof) shall not be diverted to or used for any other purpose until it be decided by the Land Court that it is in the national interests or in the interests of the community immediately concerned that it be used for some other purpose than cultivation as allotment ground.—[Mr. Graham.]
§ Brought up, and read the first time.
§ Mr. W. GRAHAMI beg to move, That the Clause be read a second time."
The three Clauses which appear before this on the Paper are not being moved because we feel that we have got all that 300 we can expect just now, and we are influenced also by the desire, as far as possible, to save the time of the House. We have put this Clause on the Paper largely from the point of view of obtaining information. Since the matter was discussed in Committee upstairs the Association of Allotment-holders in Scotland, which is a body representing all allotment-holders North of the Tweed, have considered the Bill as amended with reference to allotments, and I express their view when I say that they appreciate the the extent to which the Government has met their case. But, unfortunately, they are not clear in their minds with reference to the security of tenure as applied to existing allotments. and they suggest that a Clause of this kind might be embodied in the Bill in order to give what they regard as the reasonable seurity to which 301 they are entitled. It will be observed that the Clause excludes certain ground which might rightly be claimed, so to speak, for the purposes from which it has been diverted for use in allotments during the War, and in the second part of the Clause it is suggested that the Land Court should be the tribunal for trying cases in dispute. On that point the allotment-holders in. Scotland are in this position, that they have no desire whatever to make the Land Court the tribunal if any other tribunal which can be more satisfactory can be suggested.
7.0 P.M.
When this Clause was moved in Committee it was held that Clause 16 of the Bill, which refers 'to land for allotments, and its compulsory acquisition by a local authority, fully covered this case. But the allotment-holders consider that the ordinary interpretation which would be placed on Clause 16 as it now stands is that that Clause applies to land which may be required in the future for the purpose of allotments, and does not apply to land now used for allotment purposes. They therefore desire to have incorporated in this Bill some Clause, not necessarily this Clause, which will give them what they believe to be reasonable security of tenure. We wish to make it perfectly clear that we have no desire to secure for allotment-holders in Scotland land that is required for building, housing, industrial, or other great public purposes. What is suggested by this Clause is that where a tribunal, which has been properly appointed for the purpose, considers that it is the public interest that existing allotment-holders should be retained, effect should be given to its decision, and that men should not be turned off these allotments for what may well be other than an urgent public purpose. In the light of the needs of the allotment movement in Scotland, it is a reasonable request. Unless they have security of tenure in the next two or three years there is not the slightest doubt that a serious blow will be dealt to the extension of the allotment movement. That is a consideration in these days of high prices and of difficulty in the matter of food supplies.
§ Mr. N. MACLEANI beg to second the Motion.
§ Mr. MUNROI am very grateful to my hon. Friend for the moderate speech he has made and for the appreciation he has been good enough to express, on behalf of the 302 allotment-holders, of the provisions of the Bill. as it stands. I did not understand him to move the new Clause as a suitable Clause to go into the Bili as it stands, but rather that he moved it to obtain certain information. I hope my hon. Friend will fully appreciate the effect of the Clause and its phraseology. The effect would be to prevent the use for any other purpose of land once occupied as allotments, subject to the exceptions which are specified, till the Land Court had decided that that change was in the national or local public interest. That seems to me to be a very wide Amendment, for it covers all allotments, present or future, however established. Probably my hon. Friend has in mind simply existing allotments. Clauses 17 and 25 of the Bill give local authorities a guarded right of retention of existing allotments and very wide and simple powers for compulsory acquisition of laud for new allotments. Two-points arise on this new Clause. Is it suggested that the authority, which is to be the judge, should not be the town council but the Land Court? My hon. Friend seemed to think there was some difficulty about the tribunal. I think it would be a very anomalous thing and would be resented by ninny town councils in Scotland if the Land Court were to be introduced as the body to decide this matter. A more difficult question arises. Ought the terms and conditions upon which allotments have been laid out, or may be provided, to be set aside? That is what the new Clause involves. My hon. Friend's chief concern, I believe, was to be satisfied that the compulsory powers which are conferred by the Bill relate not only to land which may be taken in future, but to land which is now occupied for allotment purposes, and I rather gathered that if he were satisfied that that was the true interpretation of the Bill he would not press this matter further. On the best advice I can get I am assured that the expression of opinion I gave upstairs is sound, and that as worded the' Bill applies not only to land which may be acquired in future for allotments, but also to land which is now occupied for that purpose.
§ Mr. GRAHAMI wish to express my appreciation of what the right hon. Gentleman has said. May I ask whether it is not possible to incorporate a phrase in Clause 16 which would place that beyond doubt, in order to meet the point of view of these small allotment-holders?
§ Mr. MUNROMy information and advice is that the matter is now beyond doubt, but I shall have it examined again in the light of what my hon. Friend has said, and any alteration which is required I think it may be possible to make in another place.
Motion and Clause, by leave, withdrawn.