HC Deb 02 November 1930 vol 134 cc291-8

Notwithstanding the provisions of Section seven, Sub-section (4), paragraph (d,) of the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Act, 1919, no person shall exercise any powers under the provisions of this Act as a member of a county agricultural committee referred to in the said Sub-section unless he has a practical, commercial, technical, or scientific knowledge of agriculture, and no such person shall be interested financially, either directly or indirectly, in any matters dealt with by the said committee.—[Mr. Pretyman.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. PRETYMAN

I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

This proposed new Clause carries its meaning pretty clearly on the face of it. Under the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Act, 1919, county agricultural committees were to be appointed which were to be committees of the county councils, and were under the Act given certain powers. A difficulty has arisen with the county councils. The existing Act of 1919, Section 7, Sub-section (3), says:

(d) "for the appointment in the case of the council of every county (other than the London County Council) of such persons only as have practical, commercial, technical, or scientific knowledge of agriculture or an interest in agricultural land."

This clearly shows the intention of this House that these county agricultural committees should be composed of persons who have these particular qualifications. It is obvious where you are dealing with such matters as to whether or not land is properly cultivated, whether or not buildings are in tenantable repair, and other agricultural purposes, that it is very necessary that these qualifications should be possessed by these who are to adjudicate on these various matters. I understand that the Board of Agriculture have under the existing Act used their powers so far as they could. In certain cases, however, in certain counties where agriculturists are in a great minority—I believe in one case, that of Monmouthshire particularly—persons have been appointed who have not the required qualifications. When the Board of Agriculture have made representations and endeavoured to put the existing Act into operation, the County Council concerned has preferred its own course.

There does not appear to be any actual power vested in the Board of Agriculture which can override the wishes of a County Council in this matter. That was perhaps serious enough as the matter stood before the introduction of this Bill, but as it is proposed to give very considerable additional powers under this Bill it would really be intolerable, if these powers, which require in these exercising their technical knowledge, should be entrusted to people who clearly do not possess the qualifications. Therefore this Amendment has been put down. It is, I may say, urgently desired by the tenant farmers and the farming community generally, because they feel if they are to have any confidence in the action of these committees—and they look upon them in any case with considerable anxiety in view of the powers entrusted to them—if these bodies are to exercise any of these powers they must, at any rate, have the qualifications which are referred to here.

Lieut-Colonel ROYDS

I beg to second the Motion.

In addition to the explanation given by my right hon. Friend the Amendment also provides that no members of the committees shall be interested financially, either directly or indirectly, in any matters dealt with by the committee. That is not provided for by the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Act of last year. I am sure the House will agree that if we are, as we ought to have, confidence in these agricultural committees it is not only essential that they should be acquainted with agriculture, but that the members should not in any way directly or indirectly, personally be interested financially in any business that comes under their review. They have under this Bill very important additional powers. Therefore, the new Clause attempts to procure that the members shall all be agriculturists, and to deprive them of the power of exercising any of the provisions of the Bill unless they are agriculturists. My right hon. Friend said it was clearly intended when the committees were set up that the members should be agriculturists. It is certainly not so now, for in several instances other persons have been appointed. In view of the important powers entrusted under this Bill, and if these concerned are to have the confidence of the agricultural community, owners and occupiers alike.

it is essential that they should be agriculturists, and not directly or indirectly interested financially.

Sir R. WINFREY

The Amendment seems to me to be a most dangerous one, and to shut out from the committees the type of man that we have got to help us in the small holdings movement, and in the settlement of the ex-service men upon the land. Perhaps the two hon. Gentlemen opposite who have spoken have forgotten for the moment that the small holdings committees are sub-committees of the agricultural committees. The subcommittee is charged with the duty of settling the ex-service men upon the land, and, speaking personally, I can say it has been of great use to us to have one or two of these ex-service men on these committees. I am afraid that with what I feather as to the advantage of this proposed new Clause that there may be the danger of shutting out the class of man to which I have referred. Therefore I trust the Government will consider very carefully before they accept this Amendment.

Sir A. BOSCAWEN

I quite appreciate the objects of my right hon. Friend in moving this Amendment. I certainly think that these important duties should be carried out, as far as possible, by people who understand agriculture. It is perfectly true that when the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries Act was passed a year ago it was laid down that the members appointed by county councils upon the local agricultural committees must have some practical, commercial, technical, or scientific knowledge of agriculture, or an interest in agricultural land. These last words were added to bring in as persons qualified for the agricultural committees landowners who might be large owners of land, but who might have no practical or scientific knowledge of agriculture. We inserted these words in order to meet a request made by landowners, and we thought it was only fair to do so. Only in a very few cases has advantage been taken of the ambiguity of these words, and there are certain councils who have put on persons who have no practical knowledge or other knowledge of agriculture, and whose only interest in it is that they say, "Well, we are interested in it." Generally speaking, the county agricultural committees have been very well formed. In the great majority of cases the members appointed by the county councils have been, for the most part, either landowners, land agents, or tenant farmers, and it has been found necessary to add a number of representatives of labourers in order that they should have a fair representation. There are, I think, three, or at the utmost four, counties where we have great doubts as to how far they have complied with the Statute, and who have appointed persons whose interest in agricultural land is exceedingly doubtful, and we have attempted to deal with them. In one case we said, "We do not think the persons you have put on are the best persons," and they answered, "That is a matter entirely at our discretion, and you have no right to interfere." We thought that we could not take the matter beyond that. In two other cases we have asked for an assurance in writing that the provisions of the Statute have been complied with, and we received that assurance.

We have no power to insist that the strict letter of the Act of last year shall be carried out. Generally speaking, however, the Act has been well carried out, and there are only three or four cases where it has not been carried out. We retain the right to nominate one-third of the members of the county agricultural committees and of all sub-committees to which we delegate powers. Where we have been doubtful as to the qualifications of the county council nominees we have been very careful to put on a very stiff body of bonâ fide agriculturists. There is not an agricultural committee on which agriculture is not fully represented. Therefore I do not think the fears which have been expressed by my hon. Friends are really anything like so serious as might be supposed. There have been no objections raised, except in three or four cases, and even in these cases we have stiffened up the representation of the committee by our nominees. I could not accept the Amendment, which would be a tremendous interference with local government, and as my hon. Friend (Sir R. Winfrey) has pointed out, it would bar ex-service men from serving on small holdings sub-committees and the county agricultural committees.

It has been said that this matter is of far more importance, because much greater duties are being delegated to these committees than before. That is so, but the greater number of these powers are powers of the Minister, which he can delegate or not as he pleases. These are the powers which arise under Clause 4 and the Minister may delegate them or he may not. What we propose to do is to trust these committees which we have set up and delegate powers to them in the first instance, and reserve other powers. At the same time, if we are of opinion that there is any county agricultural committee which is not properly carrying out its work, and whose work is being influenced by people with political views with no agricultural knowledge, and who are not really acting in accordance with the letter and spirit of last year, we should not hesitate to withdraw these powers and act ourselves.

I claim in the first instance that we should give these agricultural committees a trial. I believe in the great majority of cases they will carry out their duties exceedingly well, and oven where persons have been put on who, strictly speaking, cannot be said to conform to the conditions of the Act of last year, I am not at all certain that the introduction of a certain amount of blood from outside will not be in some cases exceedingly useful and may tend to more vigorous action. For these reasons, and because I do not myself distrust the county agricultural committees, because I believe in most cases they will do their duties properly and because we can withdraw the powers we delegate to them, I do not see my way to accept the first part of the Amendment. As regards the second part, I think hon. Members will agree on looking at the words of the new Clause that they are far too wide. The words are: No such person shall be interested financially, either directly or indirectly, in any matters dealt with by the said council. That would bar out every landlord, tenant farmer, and nearly every agricultural labourer, because the matters they will deal with will be exclusively, as far as I know, questions relating to the land. What I think my hon. Friend meant was that they should not act in any specific matter in which they are financially interested, and for that contention I think, there are reasonable grounds. I do not think it is necessary to legislate on the question. We have dealt with it already under these Orders we have made, I mean the Cultivation Orders, under the Defence of the Realm Regulations. There is in our Cultivation of Land Order now a provision that no member of an agricultural executive committee shall take part in any decision of the committee which relates to the land of which he is the owner, the occupier, or the agent of the owner or occupier. We should be quite prepared to insert a similar provision in the Orders which we issue under this Bill by which agricultural committees will be authorised to exercise the powers of the Minister. I am prepared to give an undertaking that such an Order shall be issued barring any individual from taking part in any transaction in which he is directly or indirectly personally interested. We have done it in the case of the Cultivation Orders, and I am prepared to issue a similar Order in this case.

Mr. PRETYMAN

But the words are different. In the Order which my right hon. Friend is going to repeat there is merely a reference to the owner, occupier, or agent In this case the words are much stronger. They refer to direct or indirect financial interests. Which form is the right hon. Gentleman going to-adopt?

Sir A. BOSCAWEN

I quite agree that the words of my right hon. Friend are stronger. I cannot lay down precisely the words we will use, but I am entirely in agreement with the object he has in view. We want to bar out any transaction in which an interested party can be called upon to take a decision in his own case.

Lieut.-Colonel ROYDS

Would members of agricultural committees undertaking farming operations personally for their committee be covered by this?

Sir A. BOSCAWEN

I am quite prepared to consider the issue of Orders in the widest possible sense, but of course I cannot accept the words of the Amendment, which go much too far. I can assure my right hon. and hon. Friends we are quite at one with the object they have at heart, and we will endeavour to carry it out fully in the Orders which will be issued.

Mr. LANE-FOX

I must say I heard with some regret of the absolute inability of the Government to meet the point raised in the first part of this Clause. The right hon. Gentleman must realise that if there is one thing which will make control ineffective, it is an idea that it is going to be exercised by people who do not understand the business and are amateurs with really no authority. The right hon. Gentleman tells us that the Ministry are going to delegate powers to these committees in the hope that they would do their best, and if, in the opinion of the Ministry, they are not doing that, then the powers are to be taken away. Surely that is a far greater interference with local government than that suggested in the new Clause, which seeks to provide that the committee shall be so constituted as to be capable of doing this work. The agricultural community would resent interference from Whitehall far less if they knew that every possible means had been taken to make these committees thoroughly efficient.

Mr. PRETYMAN

I do not wish to press this new Clause to a Division if the Government do not desire to accept it. I think my right hon. Friend is aware that the feeling of the agricultural community is very strong on this matter. I myself realise the difficulty which he has in dealing with very technical matters, and which will increase if the personnel of these Committees be unsatisfactory. Still, if he does not care to accept the new Clause, that is his responsibility. He must, howover, remember that when we come to the question of control, we shall deal with the Committees as they are constituted here and not as they would be constituted if the new Clause were accepted. I am prepared to accept the right hon. Gentleman's undertaking, as far as regards the latter part of the Clause, that he will issue Orders which will be, if not in exactly the same words as the Clause, will at least carry out their full intention.

Motion and Clause, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Sir E. Cornwall)

The next Clause on the Paper— (Power for tenant to recover from landlord monies expended on certain repairs to dwelling houses occupied by workmen) —standing in the name of the hon. Member for Wellingborough (Mr. W. R. Smith), and the first Clause of the series in the name of the hon. Member for Wrexham (Sir R. Thomas)—(Constitution of Board of Agriculture for Wales)—are outside the scope of the Bill.