HC Deb 06 June 1932 vol 266 cc1671-6
Mr. MOREING

I beg to move, in page 45, line 26, to leave out the words "the use of."

I may explain that this Amendment and two others on the same Clause which stand in the name of myself and other hon. Members—in page 45, line 26, after the word "land," to insert the words

"or any building erected thereon," and in line 33, at the end, to insert the words "or building"—are really of a drafting nature, in order to make certain that we have secured protection for statutory undertakers.

Lieut.-Colonel SANDEMAN ALLEN

I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. E. BROWN

I understand from my hon. Friend that some of the dock and harbour authorities in this country think that the words in the Amendments to which he has referred ought to be inserted to draw a distinction between land and buildings, and on consideration the Minister has decided to accept this Amendment and those following with the object of making the position quite clear. He thinks it is already clear, but this will make it abundantly clear.

Sir S. CRIPPS

I am not quite sure to which words the hon. Member is referring. The first Amendment proposes to leave out the words "the use of," and I do not see how that can make any difference as to whether buildings are included. It seems to me the distinction is whether a provision in the scheme designed to apply to the use of land applies to the land itself.

Mr. BROWN

I was referring not only to this Amendment but to the other Amendments which follow. The whole effect of them, as I have said, is to make clear what we think is clear already.

Sir S. CRIPPS

I am afraid that remark does not explain the point I was trying to make. At present the Clause is limited in the sense that it contains the words— No provision contained in the scheme shall apply to the use of any land, and now it is proposed to add the words— or any building erected theron. This Amendment proposes to omit the words "the use of" and in future the Clause will read— No provision contained in a scheme shall apply to any land, that is, not merely the use of the land but the land itself. If the omission of the words "the use of" is intended to broaden the prohibition, then certainly we should object to that prohibition being broadened. If not, it would seem to us that it is better to leave he words "the use of" in the Clause, because that would make it quite clear, whereas their omission makes the position doubtful. If the Minister wants to make it clear that this applies to buildings it would be better to insert the words "or any building erected thereon," but I should have thought there must be a definition Clause which makes land include buildings, such as we usually have in Bills of this sort. If we were to insert an Amendment directly referring to buildings while leaving in the words "the use of," it would be perfectly clear to what the prohibition applies.

Mr. E. BROWN

I think the result of the omission of these words is not what the hon. and learned Member suggests. I understand that the omission of the words is a drafting necessity in order to make quite clear what we think is already clear. The Amendment has not the broadening effect which the hon. and learned Gentleman suggests.

Mr. GREENWOOD

We are getting a little bit confused by the advice which is given to us. No doubt the words "the use of" have some meaning, and perhaps the Attorney-General could give us a statement about them.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL

I did not hear what the right hon. Gentleman said, but I did hear what the hon. and learned Member for East Bristol (Sir S. Cripps) said.

Mr. GREENWOOD

I only wanted to know whether you agreed with what has been said.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL

I heard the hon. and learned Member for East Bristol say that if the words "or any building erected thereon" were included it was not necessary to leave out the words "the use of," unless there was some purpose behind it. Speaking for myself, I say quite frankly that I cannot see that there is any difference in the interpretation of the Clause whether the words "the use of" are left in or taken out. I suggest that if anyone has any real objection to their omission the House might leave them in. On the other hand if the hon. and learned Gentleman sees no real difference, I suggest that he should not take any objection to the Amendment in the form in which it has been moved. If the hon. and learned Gentleman sees any real objection, no doubt he will explain it to the House. I can but give my advice, that it does not make any real difference whether the words are in or not.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 45, line 26, after the word "land," insert the words "or any building erected thereon." —[Mr. Moreing.]

Mr. E. BROWN

I beg to move, in page 45, to leave out the words from the first word "to," in line 27 to the word "is," in line 30, and insert instead thereof the words "any statutory undertakers and."

7.30 p.m.

This Amendment and certain consequential Amendments carry out pledges given by the Government in Committee. The effect of them is to put all statutory undertakers as defined in Clause 49 in the position in which railway companies are placed in the Bill as it stands. It is also necessary to provide for cases in which the Department supervising the statutory undertaking is not, as in the case of the railway companies, the Ministry of Transport. In some cases the Board of Trade is the Department and in other cases the Ministry of Health, and if any difference arises on that point the decision is, by a future Amendment, left to the Treasury.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 45, line 33, at the end, insert the words "or building."—[Mr. Moreing.]

In page 45, line 37, after the word "shall," insert the words: where any Government department other than the Ministry of Health is concerned with the functions of the undertakers."—[Mr. E. Brown.]

In page 45, line 38, leave out the words "Minister of Transport," and insert instead thereof the words: Secretary of State or other Minister in charges of that Department.

In line 38, leave out the word "persons," and insert instead thereof the word "undertakers."

In line 42, leave out the words "Minister of Transport," and insert instead thereof the words "Secretary of State or other Minister."

In line 42, at the end, insert the words: (2) If, in connection with the giving by statutory undertakers of any consent under this Act, any question arises as to whether any or as to which Government department is concerned with the functions of any statutory undertakers the question shall be referred to and determined by the Treasury whose decision shall be final."—[Mr. E. Brown.]

Mr. E. BROWN

I beg to move, in page 46, line 1, to leave out Sub-section (2).

This is also consequential.

Amendment agreed to.