CLAUSE 22.—(Short Title and Interpretation.) (Hansard, 8 July 1919)

§ Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS
I beg to move, in Sub-section (2), to leave out the words or other public. I want to know exactly what these words mean. I do not know whether they in- 1676 clude Ecclesiastical Commissioners or the London County Council, or what. If there is any substance in the words, let them go-in, but I do not think we ought to pass a Bill which might transfer to the Minister powers of which we are unaware.

§ Sir E. HUME-WILLIAMS
I beg to second the Amendment.

§ Sir E. POLLOCK
The answer is very simple. There are a certain number of public bodies, such as the Irish Board of Works and the Congested Districts Board in Ireland. Those are illustrations of the bodies which are included in these words "or other public Department." Inasmuch as this Bill extends to Ireland, it is necessary to include words which make it applicable to those bodies.

§ Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS
I beg to move, in Sub-section (2), to leave out the words Light Railway Commissioners and. I think if these words are left in, the right hon. Gentleman himself becomes the Light Railway Commissioners. I do not think that can possibly be. If they are a Government Department, the whole of the powers and duties of the Commissioners will be transferred to the Minister, and that means apparently that he will embody in his own single person the powers and duties of the Light Railway Commissioners, and if he wants to promote a new light railway as Minister he will come before himself as the Light Railway Commissioners, and will decide as such whether the proposal is good or not. I do think that requires a little inquiring into. The Solicitor-General seems to have an air of honest doubt on his countenance, but I do not press him at this moment, if he will undertake to consider the point before the Bill goes to another place. I am sure it cannot be intended, but I am told that that is the legal effect of the words.

§ Sir E. GEDDES
The Light Railway Commissioners are not, as the Railway and Canal Commissioners arc, purely a judicial body. They were set up for the purpose of facilitating the construction and working of the railways of Great Britain. That is the purpose for which the Ministry-is set up, and what my hon. Friend suggests is undoubtedly the case under the Bill that the powers of the Light Railway Commissioners would be transferred to the Minister. Undoubtedly he would have to set up some such tribunal to hear appli- 1677 cations for the construction of light railways. Whether that body is called the Light Railway Commissioners or not does not seem to matter very much, because its functions are practically the same. Under the Bill we have already agreed that the functions of the Board of Trade in reference to light railways are already transferred to the Ministry. So far as the Government is concerned, we do not mind whether the Amendment is carried or not, because some such body is essential. This body, if it remains in existence as a separate body, has certain powers, and those powers can go to the Minister; he has them in other parts of the Bill.

§ Sir R. ADKINS
I understand my right hon. Friend to say that, while powers are taken over by himself as Minister, he would have to set up for certain purposes a tribunal analogous to the Light Railways Commissioners. If that be so, would my right hon. Friend in another place insert in the Bill words setting up such a tribunal, or indicating what it was and how it was to act, because I see the difficulty of keeping these words in the Bill when part of the administrative powers they connote are already taken over?

§ Sir E. GEDDES
If the House desires it, I am prepared to accept my hon. Friend's Amendment. I do not think it makes any difference.

§ Mr. JOYNSON-HICKS
It is a point of substance, and perhaps my right hon. Friend will accept the Amendment.

§ Sir E. GEDDES
I beg to move, in Subsection (2), after the word "Canal" ["Caledonian Canal"], to insert the words and the Commissioners of the Conservancy of the River Mersey. The Commissioners, as the House is doubtless aware, are the First Lord of the Admiralty, the President of the Board of Trade, and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. This is one of the instances, just as the Caledonian Canal was an instance, where the powers of a body set up for specific purposes are transferred to the Ministers.

§ Sir W. RAEBURN
I beg to move, in Sub-section (2), to leave out the words or any extension thereof. Those words have really to do with ser- 1678 vice by sea, and I hope the Minister-designate will accept the Amendment, because it is really on a par with his own statement upstairs in Committee. He said there that he did not wish to take any more power 'than already existed in the railways he was taking over The words were: It is not proposed to extend these existing powers in any way, but the Minister may have the same powers of such undertakings as he takes over and that There is no extension of powers in this at all. My point here would be quite met if other appropriate words were used, or if my subsequent Amendment be adopted.

§ Sir E. POLLOCK
We shall be able to accept the latter Amendment.

§ Sir W. RAEBURN
I beg to move, in Sub-section (2), after the word "thereof" ["or any extension thereof"], to insert the words which may hereafter be authorised by Parliament.

§ Sir E. GEDDES
I beg to move, at the end of Sub-section (2), to insert the words and where an undertaking is leased to or worked by a company or person other than the owners, the expression 'the owners of an undertaking' shall include that company or person, except where such an interpretation is inconsistent with the terms of the lease or working agreement, and except for the purposes of the provisions of this Act relating to payments to be made to or by the owners of an undertaking in respect of any reduction or enhancement of the value of the undertaking.