§ Order for Second Reading read.
§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."—[Captain Guest.]
§ Mr. HOGGEBefore the House is asked to agree to this Bill, surely the Minister is going to explain what it is about.
The SECRETARY of STATE for AIR (Captain Guest)The object of this small Measure is to obtain Parliamentary sanction to a voluntary agreement arrived al between the Ministry and the Corporation of the City of London. The agreement is an exchange of certain lands, and the obtaining from Parliament of a small sum of money to put the exchanged land, for the benefit of the public, into a condition suitable for recreation. The terms of the agreement are set out in the schedule, to the Bill. The necessity for the Kenley aerodrome to the Ministry can be very shortly described to the House. It will be remembered that during the War it was used as the chief aerodrome for the defence of London, and it is very desirable from our point of view-that we should be able to retain it. The second reason is that nearly £300,000 was spent during the War on the erection of hangars, and barracks on land adjoining Kenley Common. The third reason is that experience has shown that it is almost the only practicable land close to London free of fog, a very important consideration for the purposes of aviation. Also, it is capable of expansion should this at any time become necessary.
The public interests, which, of course, are the interests with which the House is most concerned, have been fully safeguarded. In our agreement with the City of London Corporation, we are acquiring 60 acres of land adjoining the 50 acres we are asking them to sell to us. Any views about open spaces being restricted by this transfer can be dispelled at once by the following facts. Instead of only 50 acres of open space being open to the public, there will be the 60 acres, and on public holidays the 50 acres in addition, making 110 acres in all. The Ministry are asking the House for £2,000 to prepare this new exchanged land and to make it suitable for purposes of public recreation. For these purposes it will be necessary for the House to grant us a money resolution. We are also giving to the public the free admission to the land they are surrendering on all public holidays, and we further undertake at no time to put any buildings on this land. Lastly, it will not be used for civil] aviation, and should it not be necessary for military purposes, it will revert to the Corporation of the City of London for the purposes of common use. The price which 2092 we are paying for the exchange is £7,000. This the House has already sanctioned when we passed the estimate a couple of months ago. The only other item of expenditure is £500 to cover legal expenses and small items of compensation which may be necessary. I hope that with this explanation the House will give us the Second Reading of the Bill.
§ Mr. MOSLEYThere is one question I should like to address to the right hon. Gentleman. This Measure entails an expenditure of £7,000. Are we really to understand that there is no aerodrome, a relic of the War, available anywhere in the vicinity of London that would be suitable for the purpose which he has in view? It does impress me as an extraordinary procedure to embark upon a new aerodrome when we must have scores of aerodromes in the country which can be put in a condition of repair for practically no expenditure at all. Does the right hon. Gentleman assure us that this is the only aerodrome which can possibly serve the purpose he has in view?
§ Lord ROBERT CECILI notice in the second Clause of this Bill that it is proposed to give rights to stop up and divert any private road or footpath. Does that mean a private footpath or a public footpath? As the Bill is drafted, it is a little doubtful which is meant. If it is proposed to stop up a public footpath, it very likely may be necessary to provide— I cannot tell without reference to the locality—but I imagine the Government will take care that, as far as possible, some other footpath will be given which will be serviceable to the public. That is usually necessary in such cases. As the Clause is drafted, it appears to give unlimited power to the President of the Air Council. That would be a new departure in legislation of this kind, and I should like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether that point has been considered?
Captain GUESTI will try to answer the two questions which have been put to me. So far as the selection of this ground as a permanent aerodrome for the defence of London is concerned, I am advised by 2093 my Department that there is no other ground so suitable that can remain the permanent central flying ground for the defence of the city. The reasons I have given have been supplied to me, and I have every reason to believe that they are unanswerable. It must not be forgotten in this connection that a very big sum of money has been spent on the very edge of this ground. Certainly no other ground near London has anything like the accommodation which those buildings provide us, nor would it house anything like so many men or machines. I think my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow (Mr. Mosley) must take it from me that so far as that point is concerned, the arguments are overwhelming.
The question asked by my Noble Friend the Member for Hitchin (Lord R. Cecil) involves a very important and at the same time technical point. It is very difficult for me to answer it at a moment's notice for fear of being misleading. I can only imagine that the Ministry would have to protect themselves from the risk of any accident occurring on the aerodrome to anybody who might be on the land when an aeroplane landed or fell. It may be that those powers are asked for purely as a release from liability.
§ Lord R. CECILI did not ask as to the powers, which are quite evidently necessary in a case of this kind, but whether the usual provision is going to be made for another footpath or public road or right-of-way where one has been taken away. So far as it can be done—it may not always be possible—it is usual, when any semi-public enterprise takes power to stop up a footpath, that they should be required to provide another footpath to serve the purposes of that which has been closed. There does not appear to be any provision of that kind in the Bill, and that is why I put the question.
§
Motion made, and Question proposed,
That the Bill be committed to Select Committee of Seven Members, Three to be nominated by the House and Four by the Committee of Selection."—[Captain Guest.]
§ Lord R. CECILI should like to know whether any interests that may be affected will be entitled to appear by witnesses and counsel before the Committee? 2094 This is evidently a matter which affects private interests, and therefore there ought to be power provided by which anyone can appear.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThat is covered by the next part of the Resolution.
§ Ordered, That the Bill be committed to a Select Committee of Seven Members, Three to be nominated by the House and Four by the Committee of Selection.
§ Ordered, That all Petitions against the Bill presented three clear days before the meeting of the Committee be referred to the Committee; that the Petitioners praying to be heard by themselves, their counsel, or agents, be heard against the Bill, and counsel heard in support of the Bill.
§ Ordered, That the Committee have power to send for persons, papers, and records.
§ Ordered, That Four be the quorum.—[Captain Guest.]