HC Deb 24 November 1919 vol 121 cc1544-53

Notwithstanding anything in any special Act or Order in force at the passing of this Act, it shall not be lawful for any authority, company, or person to establish a new or extend an existing generating station without the can eat of the Electricity Commissioners, but such consent shall not be refused unless a local inquiry has been held, and this restriction shall not apply to the establishment or extension of a private generating station provided that in the case of the establishment of a new private genarating station the owner thereof shall comply with any Regulations made by the Electricity Commissioners as to the type of current, frequency, and pressure to be used:

Provided that, in the case of a railway company using or proposing to use electricity for traction, consent shall not be refused unless it is proved to the satisfaction of the Electricity Commissioners that a district electricity board or authorised undertakers are or will be willing and in a position to give the railway company a supply of electricity at such frequency as the railway company requires, adequate in quantity and regularity to meet the present and prospective demand of the railway company, at a cost not greater than would have been incurred by the railway company in supplying themselves:

Provided also that—

  1. (a) where a group of persons carrying on or intending to carry on businesses in which large quantities of electricity are used for purposes other than for provision of mechanical power or light propose to establish a generating station for the purposes of such business;
  2. (b) where a manufacturer having a business in which electricity can be generated from energy derived from a process of manufacture carried on in his premises proposes to establish a generating station for the purpose of supplying electricity not only for his own business but also to other manufacturers whose businesses are associated therewith, the Electricity Commissioners may authorise the establishment by or on behalf of those consumers or that manufacturer of a generating station, subject to the condition that any surplus electricity generated beyond that required by those consumers or, as the case may be; by the business of that manufacturer or the associated businesses shall be supplied to the district electricity board, or any authorised undertakers, at such prices as the Electricity Commissioners may think fit and proper, and may by Order authorise the exercise of such other powers (including the breaking up of roads, railways, and tramways) as may be necessary for the purpose of obtaining such supply, and the generating station shall be treated for the purposes of this Act as though it were a private generating station.

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

I beg to move, after the word "station" ["extend an existing generating station"], to insert the words "or main transmission line."

8.0 P.M.

Sir. F. BANBURY

These words, I am afraid, are likely to cause considerable injury to the railway companies. I do not say for a moment that in this case there was an agreement with the railway companies, though the matter was discussed at very considerable length between them and the Board of Trade. The result of putting in ' main transmission line" would be to deprive the companies of any right that they might have to use the electricity which they had in their generating stations if the generating station would carry no more power than it did at the time that the Bill became law. Where a company has its own generating station it may not be used to its full capacity, and in order to use it to its full capacity new transmission lines would be necessary. If this Amendment is carried, the company will not be able to put in new transmission lines without the consent of the Electricity Commissioners. I can give an example of one company which has a power-house in a considerably unused capacity. The line has been electrified for a distance of fourteen or fifteen miles out of London, but there is enough power in the station to electrify the whole line for a distance of about thirty miles. As I understand this Amendment, that could not be done without the permission, of the Electricity Commissioners, because new transmission lines would have to be laid. That seems to be a very curious position to take up, and one not at all likely to encourage the use of electricity upon the railways. Whether or not electricity in future will be the great power on the main lines of railways I do not know; I rather doubt it. At any rate, it may be, and it will, be the great power upon most of the suburban lines. It must be remembered that this Bill is for all time, whereas on the Transport Bill power is given to the Transport Minister instead of the Board of Trade in this Bill, the second part of it, which deals with railways, has only about twenty-one months to run. We do not know what will happen in those twenty-one months. The railways may be given back to their owners, or there may be various arrangements made. This power of not being able to put in new transmission lines will remain for ever. Therefore, it is a very serious consideration for the railway companies that the Government should have taken this step at this very late hour. I suggest that the Amendment should be withdrawn. In twenty-one months from now we shall know what the future of the railways is going to be, and if they then become the property of the State, or if the State acquires any large controlling interest in them, it will be quite time to bring in a short Bill amending the Electricity Bill by putting in these word about transmission. They are premature at the present moment, and I trust the Amendment will not be pressed.

Viscount ELVEDEN

I understand that a change of policy is contemplated, and one on which many experts have divergent opinions as to its necessity. The Government will have an opportunity of raising the whole question in twenty-one months time, and that will be the proper time to raise it. If I understand the situation aright it is a question of putting up along the railways vast Eiffel Towers. In that case it would certainly be none too late to contemplate this change in twenty months' time. Mean- while your plans could be maturing, your policy could be shaped, and you may then find it necessary to get some legislation through on the subject of the railways. The proposal to leave this over till that time would not be fraught with danger to the community. On the other hand these towers might be very dangerous to those who travel by rail it they are put up in unsuitable places. It is not the owners of the property whose interests have to be looked after but of the whole community who use the railways. For two years the responsibility is out of the hands of the directors and rests upon the Minister of Transport. At the end of that time you will have to consider the whole situation as to future responsibility for the railways and it would be better to wait until then.

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

I quite followed the line of argument of the right hon. Baronet, but I think his apprehensions are not very well founded. Like so many Amendments on this measure this one is founded on the assumption that the Electricity Commissioners will do something very foolish and very unreasonable. My right hon. Friend might realise that they would have no intention of taking the transmission lines which the railway companies would want to use for their own distribution system, and preventing them from using those lines. What is intended is to prevent other transmission lines being brought in without their full assent and approval. If my right hon. Friend has so little confidence in the judgment and wisdom of the Electricity Commissioners, we might possibly meet his difficulty by an alteration in the definition of transmission lines in Clause 44; but I could not accept what he proposes now. I hope he will trust to the common sense of the Electricity Commissioners.

Sir F. BANBURY

What would you do under Clause 44?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

What I suggest in Clause 44 would be to make the definition of transmission lines so clear as to make it plain that the cables to be used by the railway companies for their own distribution would not be included in the proposal.

Sir F. BANBURY

That would suit me, and I am very much obliged, and I would be glad to accept that.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: Leave out the words "but such" ["but such consent"], and insert instead thereof the-word "which."

After the word "refused" ["shall not be refused"], insert the words "or made subject to compliance with conditions to which the authority, company, or person object."—[Mr. Bridgeman.]

The following Amendment stood on the Paper in the name of Sir FREDERICK BANBURY: After the word "held" ["has been held"], insert the words "by a competent and impartial person appointed by the Board of Trade."

Sir F. BANBURY

After the concession made by my hon. Friend it will not be necessary for me to move my Amendment. May I ask him if I understood him correctly on the previous Amendment to say that he will put down the Amendment he suggested in Clause 44?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

Yes. Perhaps the right hon. Baronet will remind me.

Amendment made: Leave out the word "and" ["and this"], and insert instead thereof the word "but."—[Mr. Bridgeman.]

Mr. WADDINGTON

I beg to move to leave out the words the owner thereof shall comply with any Regulations made by the Electricity Commissioners as to the type of current, frequency and pressure to be used, and to insert instead thereof the words the consent of the Electricity Commissioners is obtained to the type of currency, frequency and pressure to be used. The Clause as it now stands provides that Regulations have to be made by the Commissioners before a new generating station can be erected. It is felt that that provisio will act as a hardship on those who propose to experiment in electricity. In the Committee it was suggested to leave out the concluding words of the Clause, without putting in any new words, and the words which I now suggest to be inserted were suggested as a compromise, but the hon. Member who had charge of the Amendment was not prepared to accept it. I hope it may meet with the approval of the Government now, because it will give greater elasticity to those who wish to experiment and take the initiative in new forms of electrical power. We know that at the present time there are two or three different fre- quencies in this country. In America they have a quite different frequency. Probably by research and experiment we might get something which will be quite different, and which will give an electric generating plant of a type which will cost less to put in and which will be less costly in running, and the general economy will be greater. It is to allow for development of that character that this Amendment is moved.

Mr. SUGDEN

I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

I recollect the discussion on this point in Committee. I doubt whether these words are an improvement on the words in the Bill. I am advised the Commissioners would prefer to have this matter dealt with by Regulations, and, as they have to draw up the Regulations, it is perfectly obvious it could not be done without their consent. I hope, therefore, my hon. Friend will not press the Amendment.

Mr. SUGDEN

rose—

Mr. SPEAKER

The hon. Member has exhausted his right to speak.

Mr. BALFOUR

Perhaps the point will be met by the Amendment in my name which stands next on the Paper, which would have the effect of leaving the Regulations but giving protection to the working of the business. Perhaps that would meet my hon. Friend opposite,

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

I do not know whether that would meet the view of the Mover of this Amendment; if so, I would accept it, although I do not think either of the Amendments are necesary.

Mr. BALFOUR

When this Amendment was put down the Home Secretary said the words were quite new, and he asked for further time to consider them, and asked me to bring it up at this stage. It is recognised that some words like these are necessary.

Mr. WADDINGTON

I beg to withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment made: After the word "used" ["pressure to be used"], insert the words but such Regulations shall be so framed as not to interfere with the economical and efficient working of the business for which the supply is generated."—[Mr. G. Balfour.]

Sir F. HALL

I beg to move, after the word "traction," to insert the words and in the case of the owners of a dock undertaking regulated by Act of Parliament using or proposing to use electricity for the purposes of their undertaking. 'This Clause is one which restricts the establishment of new or the extension of existing generating stations without the consent of the Electricity Commissioners. Private generating stations as laid down in the Bill are exempted, but dock generating stations unfortunately have not been placed in the same category. The first Amendment which we had down this afternoon, with which the Home Secretary dealt, placed railways and docks on the same footing. Railway generating stations here come within the same category as private generating stations. That concession was obtained by an Amendment moved by my Noble Friend (Viscount Elveden) opposite in the Committee stage, and I think that he drew attention to the fact that the railways were statutory undertakings carrying out duties for the benefit of the public. Anyone who knows anything about docks knows that they are statutory undertakings, not run on a profit basis, but run for the benefit of the public at large, and I cannot see that they should not be treated in exactly the same way. There were a great many arguments in regard to docks in the Committee stage, and in Clause 7 an Amendment was carried including docks and putting them on the same basis. Perhaps it has been an omission on the part of the Home Secretary to overlook the fact that this concession had been granted to the railways. I hope that in the circumstances the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to accept this Amendment. He will remember that we have had a discussion on the subject, and though he has not committed himself to its acceptance yet I do think that he is favourably considering the matter

Mr. BALFOUR

I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

This Amendment certainly does impose more duties upon the Electricity Commissioners, and I am not quite sure that its effect will be so great as my hon. and gallant Friend thinks, but if he feels strongly on the subject and the House is agreeable I am quite willing to accept the Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: After the word "company" ["company or"] insert the words "or owners."—[Sir F. Hall.]

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

I beg to move, to leave out the words, "at such frequency as the railway company requires."

Viscount ELVEDEN

These words make an alteration in the Bill which seems to involve a technical point. It is not possible for me to express an opinion as to their effect on the railways, but as I understand it is just possible that it may affect the railways adversely to be compelled to use a frequency which they are not accustomed to use which may not be so useful for the purposes of traction. On the other hand I am advised that all electricity has to be converted when used for traction; but a point which struck me—I do not know if it has any substance, and I hope the Government will bear it in mind—is whether the words "at a cost not greater than" a little lower down really cover the possible increased cost due to using one frequency more than another as the conversion of it may be more expensive. I ask the Government to make quite sure that the cost is not when they get the electricity in bulk, but the cost when actually used. There is no hardship if you pay for the electricity, when you are using the horse-power, whether you get it done in trains by one frequency Or another as long as it goes through the same train, but it does seem to me that there is some little doubt as to what the words "at a cost not greater than" really mean, because it might be simply that you got your electricity in bulk at a cost no greater. I hope that the Government may be able to suggest some words that will safeguard the position of the railways.

Major GREAME

I would ask my Noble Friend to consider whether he is not in this matter taking a narrow view. He has been very well met by the Government today. If we regard this from a purely sectional standpoint it may do serious damage to the main purpose of the Bill. I know exactly what my Noble Friend is referring to. I understand that it is the case that the cost of transformation may be very slightly greater in the case of one frequency than another, but as against that we have got to take a broad view of this matter. The whole object of this Bill is to get power stations which are going to be run as the most efficient power stations that we can get. It would be a fatal thing if the railway companies were going to take a narrow view of this matter and we were to have two power stations instead of one. The railway companies really would suffer because it is far better from the general point of view to get a single power station to meet all requirements, and it would be unfortunate, just to meet a small point like this, to set up two power stations where one might do.

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

I think my Noble Friend was very reasonable in his speech. I gathered that he did not very much expect that the Government would change their attitude on the subject, The matter was discussed upstairs, and I believe he himself proposed the words which are in the Bill, and it was agreed that they would be considered, subject to verbal alteration, if necessary, between the Committee stage and Report. As has been pointed out if these words are left as they are, it might enable a railway company to demand some impossible kind of frequency so as to resist being linked up with another station, for that reason it seems to me necessary to move the words out. I agree that the railway companies are sufficiently protected by the word "cost" which comes lower down in the paragraph. The cost would naturally include any change of frequency between the source of supply and the railway system.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: After the word "company" ["at such frequency as the railway company requires"] insert the words "or owners."

After the word "company" ["demand of the railway company at a cost"] insert the words "or owners."

After the word "company" ["incurred by the railway company in supplying"] insert the words "or owners."—[Sir F. Hall.]

Mr. BALFOUR

I beg to move, in paragraph (a), after the word "light" ["power or light propose to establish"] to insert the words "desire to supply electricity from or."

The simple object is to give to the owner of the existing station the same right as would be given to a group of persons who propose to establish a generating station. There is another Amendment in my name immediately following which would have the same effect. In Committee it was accepted by the Home Secretary, but unfortunately, I not being expert in procedure, failed to move it in Committee before the question was put. The simple meaning of this Amendment and that which is later on the Paper is to ensure that the existing owner of a generating station may have the same right as the owner of works who proposes to establish a generating station.

Mr. SUGDEN

I beg to second the Amendment

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

I understand the effect which my hon. Friend desires to produce, but I cannot make his words read into that sense or into any sense at all. If his desire is to deal with the case of an existing station, I agree with his intention, and I think we should have words moved in another place to meet it. But the words of the Amendment as it stands are not admissible

Mr. BALFOUR

I am quite prepared to withdraw the Amendment if words can be inserted to cover the point. I think the next Amendment in my name is quite clear.

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

I would rather deal with the thing as a whole, and get words drafted by an expert to meet the whole point.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. BALFOUR

I beg to move, in paragraph (b), after the word "shall" ["the associated businesses shall be supplied to"], to insert the words "(if required by the Electricity Commissioners)."

This may be necessary for the protection of the Electricity Commissioners. The amending words are not put in with a view to getting some advantage which is not discernible on the surface, but is entirely for the protection of the Electricity Commissioners.

Mr. WADDINGTON

I beg to second the Amendment. It is an important Amendment, and will have a very considerable effect upon administration.

Mr. BRIDGEMAN

I am quite prepared to accept this, because I think it is an improvement.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: Leave out the word "obtaining" ["for the purpose of obtaining such supply and the"].—Mr. Bridgeman.]