HC Deb 06 December 1932 vol 272 cc1537-43
Sir K. VAUGHAN-MORGAN

I beg to move, in page 70, line 14, after the word "may," to insert the words "with the approval of the Advisory Committee."

The Committee are aware that the Clause deals with restricting the number of stage carriages and express carriages using certain streets, and the purpose of the Amendment is to ensure that any steps taken by the Minister shall be with the approval of the London and Home Counties Advisory Committee, so that the question may be considered from the point of view of the passenger problem for the whole of London. I trust that the Minister will see his way to accept the Amendment, because it is a helpful Amendment, and one which is likely to improve the Bill.

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

The effect of the Amendment would be to make the action of the Minister subordinate to the approval of the Committee appointed to advise him. The Minister is required by Sub-section (2) to refer the matter to the Advisory Committee for their advice and report before making any regulations. I am aware of no precedent requiring any Minister to obtain the approval of any advisory body. If such were the case they would take the place of the Minister. Therefore I do not think that the Amendment of my hon. Friend can be accepted by us.

Sir K. VAUGHAN-MORGAN

Will the hon. and gallant Gentleman be good enough to tell me what happens? Subsection (2) provides that the Minister shall consult the Advisory Committee. Having consulted them, they advise him. What does he do then? Does he accept their advice? I am only asking him to act after having accepted their advice instead of acting himself.

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

If he asks for their advice I do not think -he need necessarily accept it. The point is that the Minister asks for advice. The advice is given, and subsequent action is the responsibility of the Minister.

Sir K. VAUGHAN-MORGAN

Does my hon. and gallant Friend consider that the position is sufficiently safeguarded in Sub-section (2)?

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

I think so.

Sir K. VAUGHAN-MORGAN

I will not press the Amendment, and beg to ask leave to withdraw it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment made: In page 70, line 15, leave out from the word "section," to the end of Sub-section (1), and insert instead thereof the words: regulate the number and frequency of journeys to be made, either generally or during particular periods, by vehicles conveying passengers for hire or reward at separate fares over any street or part of a street within the special area, and may further by any such regulations—

  1. (a) classify such vehicles by reference to their class or description or the route on which, or the conditions under which, or the purposes for which, they are being operated;
  2. (b) allot, a specified number of journeys of a specified frequency or a, specified proportion of the aggregate number of journeys permitted to be made during specified periods to a particular person or group of persons by whom such vehicles or any class of such vehicles are or are to be operated, or to persons who operate such vehicles on particular routes specified in the regulations, or subject to particular conditions so specified or for particular purposes so specified, so, however, that the number of journeys allotted to persons operating vehicles with the written consent of the board -under Section sixteen of this Act shall be included in the allotment of journeys to the board;
  3. (c) require persons operating vehicles to which the regulations apply over, or over any part of, any such street as aforesaid to submit to the Minister particulars of the services maintained or to be maintained by them with such vehicles; and
  4. (d) provide for any limitation imposed by the regulations being dispensed with or relaxed in special circumstances or on special occasions."—[Mr. Pybus.]

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

I beg to move, in page 71, line 9, after the word "Minister," to insert the words "and requesting that a public inquiry be held."

Sir S. CRIPPS

Really, are we not to have an explanation of this Amendment? It is a very complicated Bill, and it is absolutely impossible to follow the purport of these Amendments unless we have some sort of explanation, a few words even, of some of these very long Amendments on the Paper. As far as I am able to understand the present Amendment, it is the insertion of a provision that there must be some request for a public inquiry before the Minister can order such inquiry. I wish to know whether there is any reason for inserting it.

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

I shall be only too glad to give the hon. and learned Member any explanation he requires to the best of my ability. The Amendment is in order to make it unnecessary for the Advisory Committee to hold a public inquiry in every case where an objection is made, unless the objectors themselves ask for a public inquiry.

Sir S. CRIPPS

Can an inquiry be held without it being asked for?

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

I do not think that it can, but this makes it absolutely clear that in future it will not be held unless the objectors themselves ask for such an inquiry. It is not clear at the moment, and therefore we wish to make it clear that it is not necessary unless they make a request.

Sir S. CRIPPS

That is an extraordinary position. Supposing the advisory committee came to the conclusion that it was a matter of such importance that there should be a public inquiry, apparently they could not act upon that opinion unless someone requested them to do so. I am sure that that cannot be the meaning of the Subsection. It seems to be very stupid if it is.

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

The advisory committee can always hold an inquiry if they so wish, but objectors, the outsiders, must make a demand for it before they are able to have an inquiry.

Sir S. CRIPPS

I am much obliged. The hon. and gallant Member said exactly the opposite before. That is why I was rather confused.

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

Not exactly.

Amendment agreed to.

Sir PAUL LATHAM

I beg to move, in page 71, line 12, to leave out from the word "organisation," to the end of the Sub-section, and to insert instead thereof the words: and any other person whose interests may be affected by the proposed regulations shall be entitled to be heard in support of the objection or of the proposed regulations. I formally move the Amendment on behalf of my hon. Friend the Member for Kennington (Mr. Harvey).

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

This is an Amendment which we are able to accept. It will enable other person affected as well as those organisations representing the public service vehicles to be heard in the event of the advisory committee holding a public inquiry.

Major MILNER

What provisions are there to enable the public to know that such an inquiry will be held? Is there any provision for public advertisement? If not, the insertion of the proposed words will be useless.

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

There are rules and procedure under the London Traffic Act which refer to this matter, under which notices can be given. I appreciate what the hon. and gallant Member says, but presumably anything that is in an Act ought to be known by the public. If, however, we find that it is desirable to give some form of notice that is not in the Bill, I will look into the matter. I am wiry grateful to the hon. and gallant Member for drawing attention to it.

Amendment agreed to.

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

I beg to move, in page 71, line 29, to leave out from the word "continues, ' to the end of the Sub-section.

This Amendment is to do away with the necessity of giving notice to an offender in the prescribed form before he can be charged with a continuing offence. No such notice is normally required before proceedings can be taken for a continuing offence. The circumstances do not appear to justify the requirement of notice.

9.6 p.m.

Sir S. CRIPPS

I do not quite follow the argument behind the Amendment. I should have thought that notice of an offence should be given before action is taken to prosecute for the offence and that it was a reasonable step to take before starting to prosecute a person that he should have some notice that he is infringing the Act, even if it is a continuing offence. I do not know what may be the view of the Solicitor-General but it seems to me an equitable thing in an offence of this sort that the person should have notice. Unless there is a strong reason for omitting the words, the Committee ought to leave them in.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL

I do not think it is necessary to give notice to an offender when he is continuing an offence. Presumed knowledge of the law applies in such a case. I am not aware of any similar case in which there is a provision that notice must be given to one who is continuing an offence.

9.8 p.m.

Major MILNER

This is a very technical Bill and there are apparently numbers of occasions on which vehicle proprietors may be brought up under this Clause. Therefore, there ought to be some provision whereby notice is given. It might happen that, unwittingly, a perfectly well disposed individual, who is desirous of carrying out the law, may commit some offence under a regulation, and it seems to me unfair that if he commits that offence for a period of, perhaps, six months or even longer he should be liable to a fine of £20 for the first offence and £50 for a second offence or subsequent offence. I am reminded by my hon. and learned Friend that this does not relate to what is ordinarily termed a continuing offence, but to a first offence, on which a fine of £20 can be imposed, or to a second offence, for which a fine of £50 can be imposed. In the case of a continuing offence, which may be a continuing first offence, there can be a further fine of for each day on which the offence continues, after notice of the offence has been given. The provision as to notice ought to remain. It applies to the first offence and to a continuing offence. In regard to a first offence it ought not to be possible to inflict not only a fine of £20 but a fine of £5 a day for a continuance of that offence, which might amount to a very considerable sum. While desirous of keeping within the law people may honestly commit an offence under the regulations. Therefore, the original words ought to remain.

Sir S. CRIPPS

I am afraid that I was unwittingly misled. The words after notice of the offence has been given 9.10 p.m.

do not apply only to the continuing offence. They are words that apply to an offence whether it be the first, a second or a continuing offence. The words are: (4) Any such regulations may provide for imposing fines…not exceeding in the case of a first offence 20 pounds, or in the case of a second or subsequent offence 50 pounds, together with, in the case of a continuing offence, a further fine not exceeding five pounds for each day on which the offence continues after notice of the offence has been given. The words: After notice of the offence has been given apply to all the offences, first, second and further offences. Therefore, if the words are taken out it will mean that a fine can be imposed without any notice in a first offence. I am sure that that is not the intention.

9.12 p.m.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL

Exactly the same provision is made in the Road Traffic Act. There is no provision there for notice and I cannot really see any reason why notice of offence should be given to the first or any other offence under this Act as distinct from similar cases under the Road Traffic Act. Such questions as inadvertance and the rest of it are eminently matters for the magistrates who have to deal with them. The usual provisions enable the magistrates to give full effect to the consideration that a man is a first offender or that he has acted through inadvertance. I cannot see why notice should be given in this case as distinct from others.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 71, line 35, leave out the words "the traffic commissioners for any area," and insert instead thereof the words: the Traffic Commissioner for the Metropolitan Traffic Area."—[Lieut. - Colonel Headlam.]

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

I beg to move, in page 71, line 36, at 9.14 p.m. the end, to insert the words: () Nothing in this section or in any regulation made thereunder shall apply to any tramcar or trolley vehicle which is being operated under statutory powers. The object of the Amendment is to make clear the intention that the Clause is not applicable in the case of tramcars or trolley vehicles.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS

Why should tramcars and trolley vehicles be outside the Act? Are they special favourites of the Minister?

Lieut.-Colonel HEADLAM

Because they cannot deviate from the route.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS

The Minister says that it is because they cannot deviate from the road. We ought in justice to the Committee to have some real reason, apart from that, why they are to be excepted. Tramcars are not things that should have any special privilege over other vehicles which are much more modern and up-to-date. These old fashioned things are being given a privilege. Is it a relic of the late Government, who did everything they could to encourage prehistoric ideas?

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 71, line 39, leave out from "1924" to the end of the sub-section.—[Lieut.-Colonel Headlam.]