§ Mr. E. BROWNI beg to move, in page 34, line 37, to leave out the words "or a general development order."
This is a drafting Amendment consequential on the decision that general development orders are not to carry any right to compensation or betterment.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Mr. E. BROWNI beg to move, in page 35, line 11, to leave out Sub-section (4).
This Amendment omits Sub-section (4), which makes betterment a charge on the land, and which has already been explained to the House.
§ Sir S. CRIPPSI am not certain as to what the position is going to be after the omission of this Sub-section. It was originally inserted in order that speculators who were in possession of land might not clear out when a town planning scheme was made and leave the local authority without any redress as regards the betterment charge. The right hon. Gentleman told us that the vendor would be looked to for the betterment. That seems to be exactly the type of case which Sub-section (4) was intended to cover in the original Bill. A speculator in a developing area where there is a town planning scheme, or where there is likely to be a town planning scheme, would be able to clear out and disappear with the money for which the land had been sold, and the local authority would be left without any redress. I wish to ask what security will the local authority have instead of that Sub-section. What does the right hon. Gentleman intend to substitute for it? I presume that he is not going to leave the local authority at the mercy of the speculator and we should like to know what is his alternative to Subsection (4)?
Sir H. YOUNGIf the betterment becomes a personal debt upon the vendor of the land and not a charge upon the land then, as I understand it, there is no security except the personal security of the vendor himself, but it is considered that in the new circumstances as regards the recovery of the betterment debt, that will not be any appreciable disadvantage. A debt upon the land would fall upon the purchaser and not upon the vendor, and there would be a 1656 charge by the purchaser against the vendor which would necessitate a cumbrous series of adjustments. In these circumstances, it is thought that to make the betterment a charge on the land would be impracticable. The betterment will be recoverable as a debt from the vendor and you will have the vendor in possession of the purchase money of the land which puts him in a position to pay the debt․—
§ Sir S. CRIPPSIf he does not get away.
Sir H. YOUNGAt any rate ad hoc and to the extent of the debt he is ex hypothesi solvent, but in view of the criticism of the hon. and learned Member I will give some further consideration to the matter in order to make sure that we are securing the position as far as it can be secured in view of the new conditions.
§ Amendment agreed to.