§ Mr. JOHNSTONI beg to move in page 21, line 26, after the word "reference," to insert the words "in Part II of this Act."
§ This is a purely drafting Amendment.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. JOHNSTONI beg to move, in page 22, line 36, after the word "fee," to insert the words:
the expression 'agricultural buildings' means buildings which are included in any agricultural land and heritages as defined in the Rating and Valuation (Apportionment) Act, 1928.This is consequential on an earlier Amendment moved by the Minister of Agriculture in order to bring Scotland into line.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. JOHNSTONI beg to move in page 22, line 37, after the word "the," to insert the word Chartered."
Since the Bill was introduced, the Surveyors' Institution has become a chartered body; it is therefore necessary to insert this word.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Further Amendment made: In page 22, line 38, after the second word "the," insert the word "Chartered."—[Mr. Johnston.]
§ Mr. JOHNSTONI beg to move, in page 23, line 7, at the end, to insert the words:
(g) Sub-section (3) of Section sixteen of this Act shall apply with the substitution of a reference to the Agriculture (Scotland) Fund for any reference to the Smallholdings Account.This deals with the authorisation of the expenditure on allotments. It has already been approved so far as England is concerned, and this brings Scotland into line.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§
The following Amendment stood upon the Order Paper: In page 22, line 18, at the end, to insert the words—
§ Major ELLIOTMay I ask the Under-Secretary of State how far he proposes to move this Amendment. Perhaps he would move paragraph (h) alone so that we can consider that, because it is quite separate from paragraph (i).
§ Mr. JOHNSTONThe purpose of this Amendment is to give the Department power and facilities for standardising their buildings. In England this power is not required, because the Government have already power to override small petty by-laws on their land. In Scotland, we have such power under other Smallholdings Acts, and we require it here. There has been an extraordinary instance of the necessity for giving this power where, on the opposite sides of the same road, different by-laws obtain. That makes the operations of the Department exceedingly difficult. It is the Department of Health, and not the Department of Agriculture, which must be satisfied in these matters.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe Amendment on the Paper will have to be divided into two, and the Under-Secretary of State will have to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, to insert paragraph (i) after the words last inserted.
§ Mr. JOHNSTONI beg to move, in page 23, line 18, at the end, to insert the words:
(h) Where the Department in the exercise of any power conferred on them by any enactment erects a building on any land, in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the Department of Health for Scotland, the provisions of any statutory enactment, by-law, rule, regulation, or other 302 provision, under whatever authority made, relating to the construction of new buildings, shall, in so far as inconsistent with such plans and specifications, not apply to such building as aforesaid;
§ Major ELLIOTNo such drastic words have ever been laid before the House of Commons. The suggestion is not merely the overriding of some petty by-laws, which is a very perfunctory way of describing our local government statutes, but it may apply to every Statute passed by this House.
§ Mr. JOHNSTONThe hon. and gallant Gentleman himself got these powers in 1025 in the Housing (Scotland) Act.
§ Major ELLIOTWe were dealing there specifically with the question of housing, but this is a suggestion that the Minister of Agriculture should, in the erection of any of these smallholdings buildings, not be required to comply with any of the regulations with which every private farmer has to comply. If he cared to put up a cow-shed which did not comply with the specifications of the Milk and Dairies Act, that Act would not apply to him. He could also put up a house for an agricultural labourer without sanitary accommodation, water or drainage, and would not be obliged to observe those things which are applied to a private landlord or owner-occupier or any-body else who puts up any such building. It is true, as the Under-secretary of State says, that any buildings would have to be approved by the Department of Health. That sounds very fine and large, but who is the Department of Health? The omnipotent Pooh-Bah Secretary of State is the Department. He comes down one morning to breakfast, and says, "My dear Mr. Adamson, I feel you are being seriously hampered in your building operations by the laws which have recently been passed by the House of Commons." Mr. Secretary Adamson says, "Willie"—or words to that effect—" I fully agree, my boy." One says
to the other, "If you bring forward a submission in due course, I shall be glad to authorise it." Since the Lord Chancellor in one of Gilbert and Sullivan's operas, no more comprehensive Committee has been conceived.
§ Mr. MacLARENScottish Home Rule.
§ Major ELLIOTEven under Scottish Home Rule, the Secretary of State will have to be responsible to the Parliament of Scotland. It is suggested that no statutory enactments shall apply to the Minister. I remember the reasons which have caused this provision to be brought forward. There was an occasion upon which the Secretary of State, represented by the Department of Health, was about to serve an injunction on the Secretary of State, as represented by the Department of Agriculture, that the buildings which the Secretary of State, as represented by the Department of Agriculture, had put up did not satisfy the sanitary regulations of the Secretary of State as represented by the Department of Health. That, however, was under the salutory statutory enactments of this House, which brought security to the wretched people who are living in these houses, which they will not have if this provision is passed. The case is no doubt on the files, and the Department would be able to find it in a very short time if they liked to delve into things which are often better left unturned. The Minister should really give some further justification of the proposal which he brings forward than he has done; otherwise, I cannot see, with every desire to facilitate business, how we can let this proposal pass without a Division. It is the most far-reaching proposal which could be brought before Parliament, and it is not possible to say that it would be to the good either of the tenants who have to live in these buildings or of the farming operations which may have to he carried on in them.
§ Mr. JOHNSTONI appreciate what a splendid debating point the hon. and gallant Gentleman has got, but, as a matter of fact, these powers are already possessed by the English Ministry in regard to Crown land. There is nothing new in them. We are only seeking to get for the Department in Scotland powers which are already possessed in England. No one knows better than the hon. and gallant Gentleman that it is the constant endeavour of the Department in Edinburgh not only to comply with the wishes of the local authorities but to carry out the law. This proposal arises out of a case in Haddingtonshire, where there were different by-laws operating on oppo- 304 site sides of a road, and it is desirable that the Department of Health should have the power to certify a certain standard of building. This would secure uniformity and save the country expense by standardisation. By-laws vary, and that means that the Department must vary its plans. As I have already said, some local authorities require certain kinds of washhouses and others do not; and there are other variations of that type. Personally, I do not think it is a matter of very great importance. The power will require to be exercised perhaps only once in a decade. It will be remembered by the hon. and gallant Member that in the Housing Act of 1925 he asked for and got similar powers, and if it is thought that the powers already possessed by local authorities ought to be safeguarded, so that the Department of Health and not the Minister of Agriculture must operate them, then we will not fight about it. But I would point out to the hon. and gallant Member and his friends that they might perhaps consider the advisability of letting this Amendment go in and consider, before the Bill goes to another place, in view of the difficulties in administration, whether on the whole it is not better that the Department in this instance as in others should have these powers.
§ Major ELLIOTI can only speak again by the leave of the House, but I would point out, first, that the statement of the Under-Secretary that the powers might need to be exercised only once in a decade shows that no grave administrative inconvenience would be caused if the powers were not inserted; and, secondly, that it does cause inconvenience if farming operations have to comply with two different sets of by-laws. If these powers are so necessary and so much desired they might be brought in in a way which would allow of fuller discussion than on the Report stage, when we are anxious to get through the business of the House. There is another Scottish Bill in Committee upstairs, and the Under-Secretary might put down a new Clause to cover the point if he decides that it ought to be incorporated in the law of Scotland. It is not necessarily germane to this Bill at all.
§ Mr. JOHNSTONIn view of the opinion expressed by hon. Gentlemen opposite, I will withdraw the Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Mr. JOHNSTONI beg to move, in page 23, line 18, at the end, to insert the words:
(i) Sub-section (3) of Section eighteen -of the Land Settlement (Scotland) Act 1919, shall have effect as if for the purpose therein specified there were substituted the following purposes:(a) the provision of allotments or allotment gardens and the purchase or leasing and equipment of land therefor;(b) the making of grants or loans to local authorities or to societies or associations having as their object or one of their objects the provision of allotments or allotment garden's in aid of expenditure by such authorities, societies, or associations in connection with the provision of allotments or allotment gardens.It is the second part of the original Amendment which I am now moving, and it is moved in fulfilment of the pledge given to the hon. Member for Kincardine (Mr. Scott) and, indeed, to hon. Members on all sides of the House. It deals with allotments and makes it quite clear that the £4,000 which we have voted for allotments may be used to secure the provision of allotments.
§ Mr. SCOTTIn Committee I moved a Clause to deal with this matter but withdrew it on the undertaking given to me by the Under-Secretary. I have considered this new Amendment and I am of opinion that it fully implements the pledge which the Government gave. It removes any dubiety as to the purpose for which the fund referred to may be applied. I hope the passing of this Amendment will give a fillip to the allotment movement in Scotland. It is only permissive and not mandatory, but I think we may leave it with safety in the hands of the Department of Agriculture, in the belief that they will put all their strength behind it in order to develop allotments. Along with that move from the Department of Agriculture one hopes that the local authorities will now exercise the powers they have under the Act of 1926, in order that all may go forward together.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. JOHNSTONI beg to move, in page 23, line 19, to leave out the words 306 "Sub-section (8) of Sections," and to insert instead thereof the words "Sub-sections (8) and (9) of Section."
The necessity for this Amendment arises out of the insertion of a new Clause, Clause 7, which alters the numbers of the succeeding Clauses.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. JOHNSTONI beg to move, in page 23, line 20, to leave out the word "seven."
§ Major ELLIOTWhy is this Amendment being moved?
§ Mr. JOHNSTONThe remark I made a moment ago covers this Amendment also. A new Clause was inserted in the Bill, and therefore the numbers of the succeeding Clauses require alteration.
§ Major ELLIOTBut this is a matter of some importance. The Bill says that Section 7 shall not apply. Section 7 is the rather famous Clause giving power to provide a smallholding for an applicant who is an agricultural worker, even 'although he be not unemployed. We observed with some interest that that had been left out of the Bill, and I understood that the rather complicated procedure of re-committal and amendment which is to follow was to deal with that point.
§ Dr. ADDISONI am sorry to intervene, but this relates to paragraph (h on page 23 of the Bill, where it states:
Sub-section (8) of Sections three, and Sections seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, and fifteen, and paragraph (c) of Part I of the First Schedule shall not apply.This refers to Part I of the First Schedule. It is not Clause 7 of the Bill.
§ Mr. JOHNSTONIt is a purely drafting Amendment.
§ Major ELLIOTIt is extraordinarily complicated. Do I understand that these are sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 15 of the Schedule and not of the Bill?
§ Mr. JOHNSTONOf the Schedule.
§ Major ELLIOTI do not think it is by any means self-evident on the face of it.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Further Amendment made: In page 23, line 20, leave out the words "and 307 fifteen," and insert instead thereof the words "twelve, thirteen, and seventeen." —[Mr. Johnston.]