HC Deb 08 March 1920 vol 126 cc900-1
54. Mr. N. CHAMBERLAIN

asked the Minister of Transport whether it is proposed to raise the tolls on the canals now controlled by his Department; whether this can be done without his first taking possession of them under Section 3 of the Transport Act; whether he proposes to exercise the powers granted to him for this purpose under that Section; and, if so, at what date and in respect of what canals?

Mr. NEAL

A deputation from the Canal Association, which I recently received on behalf of the Minister, strongly urged him to take possession, under Section 3 of the Ministry of Transport Act, of the canals now controlled by him under the Defence of the Realm Act Regulations, as a necessary step to his giving directions for the raising of the tolls. The question is one of extreme difficulty and complexity, and no decision has yet been arrived at. There will be no unnecessary delay in dealing with the matter. This reply does not affect the canals which are railway owned and in the possession of the Minister as part of the railway undertakings.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN

May I ask whether the hon. Gentleman does not think it desirable to take possession of these canals at the earliest possible moment, in order that the tolls may be raised and an end put thereby to the subsidy now being paid?

Mr. NEAL

There is a great deal to be said in favour of that course, but, as I intimated in the answer, there are difficulties in connection with it. The whole subject is being mast carefully considered.

Sir J. BUTCHER

Can the canals pay their way without a raising of the tolls?

Mr. INSKIP

Is it proposed to submit this question, with others, to the Committee the hon. Gentleman indicated?

Mr. NEAL

That Committee has not yet been definitely appointed. This certainly will be a very convenient topic for its consideration.

55. Mr. CHAMBERLAIN

asked the Minister of Transport whether the canals now controlled by his Department would revert to the canal companies on the expiry or revocation of the Defence of the Realm Regulations; whether, in such an event, the companies would be entitled to be placed in the same financial position as regards revenue and expenditure as they were before the War; and, if so, how it is proposed to effect this purpose?

Mr. NEAL

The answer to to first part of the question is in the affirmative as regards canals controlled by the Minister under Defence of the Realm Regulation 9H. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative, but it must not be assumed that the owners have suffered financially by the control.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN

Can the hon. Gentleman give me any assurance that possession will be taken of the canals before the expiry of the Regulation, seeing that there is great anxiety on the part of canal companies as to their position?

Mr. NEAL

I can assure my hon. Friend that a definite decision will be arrived at long before that.