HC Deb 21 June 1933 vol 279 cc896-912

Resolved, That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under the Gas Undertakings Acts, 1920 and 1929, on the application of the Hastings and St. Leonards Gas Company, which was Presented on the 25th day of May and published, be approved, subject to the following modifications: —

Section 5, page 2, sub-section (1), at end, insert,— Provided that any difference under this sub-section shall be decided by two justices. Section 5, page 3, leave out sub-section (3).

Resolved, That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under the Gas Undertakings Acts, 1920 and 1929, on the application of the Devon Gas Association, Limited, with respect to the Ashburton urban district, which was presented on the 29th day of May and published, be approved.

Resolved, That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under the Gas Undertakings Acts, 1920 and 1929, on the application of the Northampton Gaslight Company, which was presented on the 16th day of May and published, be approved."—[Dr. Burgin.]

Motion made, and Question proposed, That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under the Gas Undertakings Acts, 1920 and 1929, on the application of the Sunderland Gas Company, which was presented on the 15th day of March and published, be approved, subject to the following modifications: — Section 3, page 2, line 20, after added limits,'insert' together with so much of such portions of the added limits.' Section 3, page 2, line 21, leave out 'and the added limits,' and insert 'as are outside the county borough of Sunderland as constituted at the date of this Order.' Section 3, page 2, line 29, leave out 'April,' and insert 'July.' Section 19, page 11, after sub-section (3), insert,— Provided that the amount so credited shall not be applicable in or towards increasing the dividend for any year on the ordinary stock of the company beyond that which would be payable for that year if one-eighth of the sum calculated pursuant to paragraph (1) of section sixteen (Division of surplus profits) of this Order were applied for the benefit of the holders of ordinary stock.' Section 21, page 12, after sub-section (3), insert,—

(4) The amount standing to the credit of the contingencies and renewals fund of the company at the prescribed date shall be credited to the renewal fund authorised by this section.

(5) As from the prescribed date section one hundred and twenty-two of the Com- panies Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, shall cease to apply to the company.'"—[Dr. Burgin.]

11.38 p.m.

Mr. LUKE THOMPSON

I beg to move, in line 4, to leave out from the word "be," to the end of the Question, and to add instead thereof the words: referred to a Select Committee of four Members appointed by the Committee of Selection for their Report which shall state whether, in their opinion, the Order should be approved with or without modifications or additions, and setting out the modifications or additions, if any, which they propose, or should not be approved' and shall be laid before the House, together with a copy of the Order showing the modifications and additions, if any, proposed by the Committee: that the proceedings of the Committee to which the Order is referred shall be conducted in like manner as in the case of a Provisional Order Confirmation Bill under Standing Order 159, and opponents of the Order shall be heard, provided that a Statement of Objection has been deposited in the Committee and Private Bill Office of the House of Commons on or before the seventh day after the date of this Motion, but an opponent shall only be heard upon objections which have been distinctly specified in the statement. If no Statement of Objection 6hall have been deposited within the specified time, or if all such statements so deposited have been withdrawn before the meeting of the Committee, the order of reference to the Select Committee shall be discharged. I move the Amendment on behalf of the Sunderland Corporation which represents the very large majority of consumers supplied by the company and I want to make it plain to the House that the local authority take a very serious view of the matter. There have been four resolutions carried in the council; therefore the Amendment I am moving has the full authority of the Sunderland town council. My object is to be as fair as possible to the Order. Its object is to substitute a basic price and a basic rate of dividend for the present maximum price and maximum dividend. On that point I think there can be no quarrel. Under the Order the company are entitled to increase their dividend beyond the basic rates of dividend if the price charged is below the basic price authorised. Well and good. If we can get a reduced cost I have no objection. The Order has been before the director of gas administration on behalf of the Board of Trade, and it has been considered by a Committee of the other House and certain modifications have been made.

No complaint whatever has been made of the Sunderland Gas Company. It is a well managed concern: I have known its management all my life. It has paid a consistent dividend since the maximum dividend was instituted in 1919, and for half a century before a full dividend, so that it has continuously paid a maximum dividend. It has also expended huge sums of money, £150,000 out of revenue, for capital purposes and has piled up its reserves by putting £6,000 to a contingency fund, and has made nominal additions to capital by the conversion of something like £86,500. It may be said that we get cheap gas in Sunderland. That is true, we have the facilities, but in a near neighbourhood they have gas at 2d. per them less. I say this because one of the results of the Order will be that apart from any effort or efficiency on their part this Company will be able to add to their basic dividend one-half per cent. straight away, which we contend should have gone to the consumers.

The explanation of that is that when the Order was enquired into by the Director of Gas Administration in the Board of Trade, the Company put forward certain estimates on which they built a basic price of 6½d. per them. The Board of Trade in granting the Order reduced the basic price to 6d., and when the matter came before the Committee of another place the promoters, in order to justify the lower basic price of 6d. per them, introduced a new item which was assessed at 27 of a 1d. per them in respect of savings which had been effected since 1931 and were reflected in the 1932 accounts. It is without precedent to include in the items making a basic price an item of savings arising from improved workings or the takings of a gas company prior to the application for the basic price being made. A new principle has been set up in the application of this Order. It can be stated without fear of contradiction that in all previous cases where basic prices have been fixed they have been looking forward from the date of the application instead of bringing in something that has happened before. The result is that this Company will be able to charge immediately this ½ per cent. extra on the basic price for which they have not worked.

That is the first count, and I think it is enough to have this matter referred to a special Committee of the House. Let me take the second count. Added to these very generous and favourable conditions there is in my opinion no real adequate provision for a revision of the basic price. A most serious position has been created. Under Clause 14 of the Order provision is made for a revision of the basic price: If at any time after three years from the prescribed date it is shown to the satisfaction of the Board of Trade that the costs and charges on and incidental to the production and supply of gas have substantially altered from circumstances beyond the control of or which could not reasonably have been avoided by the company the board may if they think fit on the application of the company or of any local authority make an Order correspondingly revising the basic price. That is all right up to a point, but there is a further circumstance arising. This Company may under this Revision Clause go on taking an unlimited supply of coke oven gas. I know that in the present circumstances they are taking supplies, but the possibility is that they may take even to the extent of the full supply, and under this Provisional Order what the Gas Company can do is to sit quiet, in a sense, as distributors or refiners of coke oven gas, and reap the rich reward of an increased dividend without any prospect at any time of revision by the authority which should regulate the statutory conditions of this company. That seems to me to be an intolerable position. I have served four years on special Committees dealing with local legislation, and in all cases that I know of, when this question of revision has come up, there has been particular care taken. That was so as recently as 1931 in the case of the Gas Light and Coke Companies Act and in the case of the Newcastle Gas Company. A provision was there made that the company or the local authority was able to apply within a specified period for a revision of the basic price, and on such an application being made the company were permitted to ask that any decrease in the cost of production due to their efficiency might be taken into account. There is no such provision in this case.

If the House is going to say to an authority that under no conditions whatever may the Board of Trade interfere or revise the basic price, it seems to me to be a very ridiculous position. I want this matter to be referred to a special Committee. The question whether or not that course should be taken should be left to the House to determine, without the Government endeavouring to influence the decision one way or the other In another place the question whether a special gas Order ought to be referred to a Select Committee for consideration is determined by the Special Orders Committee, but this House has no such powers. If the Board of Trade says an Order must go through, we have no power to say that, if a fair case is put up, it should be referred to a committee. It may be argued that this is a Gas Order and is different to an ordinary application for a Private Bill. I have spent a good deal of time on private Bills, and it is the ordinary and reasonable procedure that these Bills should be referred to a Committee of each House. For these reasons, this Order should be referred to a special Committee.

I do not want to be sentimental, but I would remind the House that Sunderland is at present suffering, like many other centres, from an unexampled depression. We have 26,000 or more out of work, representing 70,000 out of a population of under 200,000. Of the insured male population, 57 per cent. are out of work. It seems to me contrary to the principles for which we stand to come to this House under those conditions and to make it possible, without any further effort or efficiency on the part of the company, for this gas company to embark upon adding another half per cent. to its dividend. I had been hoping that there would be some agreement reached, but that has not been the case. When the Parliamentary Secretary replies, I hope that he will make it possible at this late hour for the two points I have emphasised to be reconsidered and that, as far as the ruling Clause is concerned, he will be favourable to the adoption of the Clause to which I have referred.

11.53 p.m.

Sir WILFRID SUGDEN

At this late hour I shall put my points briefly from two aspects only. First, when this House is dealing with a commercial company which is protected by statute, it should be extremely careful how the company uses that power and it should see that that power, with the protection of the statute behind it, is used legitimately in the interests of the public. The hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. L. Thompson) has made out a case showing that a legitimate asset is being given to this company without due credit being given on the other side of the balance, i.e., to the public. Secondly, I would point out that the railways are compelled to submit to the closest inspection and regulation by this House and the other House, while the Board of Trade can give a special power to this company and similar companies without proper supervision and regulation. One must compare the action of the Gas Light and Coke Company in 1931 in accepting a wide measure of discipline with the action of this small company in the north of England, which asks to be placed in a special position, more privileged than the position of the greatest gas company in the country. Lastly, I would ask the House to bear in mind a point which is important under the new principles of protection for industry upon which we, as a National Government, have embarked. Unless we are very careful, the special power suggested here by the Board of Trade in the case of this gas company may be applied to every other industry in the country and even by the municipality. I ask the House to protect its own powers, to protect the public as regards the price which an undertaking of this kind may claim from them and also to protect with great care the new system which is being experimented with in respect of other industries, so that the public shall not be exploited.

11.56 p.m.

Mr. STOREY

In opposing the Amendment which has been moved by the senior Member for Sunderland (Mr. L. Thompson), I do not propose to deal with all the points which the local authority has made in the circular sent to Members of the House. [An HON. MEMBER: "Where is Sunderland? "] It is a place which people in the south of England ought to know more about, and if those in the south took a little more interest in the north, it would be for the public good. Stating the position in the simplest terms, the local authority has two objects in opposing this Order. First, they want an undertaking that the company will not increase its dividend for a period of two years. I am surprised that my hon. Friend the Mover of the Amendment should have led the House to think that in the next two years the company will increase its dividend. He made capital out of the fact that Sunderland is a depressed area, and argued that the company should not, therefore, increase its dividend. He knows that an undertaking was asked for and given under which the company is prepared, outside the Order, to undertake that for two years from the prescribed date in the Order, they will not pay a higher dividend than the existing maximum of 6 per cent. The second object of the local authority is that they shall be able to apply for a revision of the basic price, if the cost of production and supply is substantially diminished, in consequence of an increased supply of coke oven gas being available. The purpose of these basic price Orders to if promote efficiency and economy on the part of gas undertakings and allow of the division of the results of such economy and efficiency among consumers, employes and shareholders.

This Order provides that if any circumstances outside the control of the gas company reduce the cost of production and supply, the local authority should apply for a revision of the basic price. Therefore, a gas company can only get the benefit of the results of its own energy and not of the results of things outside its control. It is desirable that we should encourage gas undertakings to use coke oven gas which would otherwise be largely wasted. To use it requires enterprise, initiative and business acumen on the part of the management, ability to conduct difficult negotiations and the wise provision of stand-by plants. Is a company which displays these abilities to have no reward? What gas company is going to set about these difficult negotiations and the provision of this stand-by plant, if they are not to have any reward for their initiative? The House would be well advised to let the Order go through and allow the company to gain the benefit of any initiative and energy which they display.

This Order follows other Orders applying to more than 50 per cent. of the gas sold in this country. It gives the second lowest basic price in the country. The actual price of gas in Sunderland is among the lowest in the country. A lower percentage of benefit to the share- holders than is allowed under other basic Orders is allowed under this Order. It has been thoroughly thrashed out in a Select Committee in another place. No Amendments were made in the course of that investigation in another place, except those which the company themselves offered to make and the Committee thought desirable. The chairman of the finance committee of the local authority has himself said that already sufficient expenditure, without any satisfactory result, has been incurred, and I do not think there is any reason for incurring further expenditure on further discussion.

These Orders are a method of procedure intended to be cheaper for these gas undertakings than the procedure by Act of Parliament, but if we are to have such fractious opposition as I submit is now being put up by the local authority, we are going to stultify this form of procedure. I hope the House will prevent the further waste of the ratepayers' and gas consumers' money which would be entailed by ordering another investigation by a Select Committee of this House. In asking the House to reject this Amendment, I want to make it clear that I have no interest whatever in the gas company. I do so for the simple reason that I think this Order is in the interests of the gas consumers in the town that I represent, and, therefore, I oppose the Amendment.

12.3 a.m.

Colonel CHAPMAN

I think the House will feel that this is a case of a house divided against itself, when we have one hon. Member for Sunderland speaking on one side and the other hon. Member for Sunderland speaking on the other, but I hope that the House will support the Order, because I also represent a portion of Sunderland and so the greater number of Sunderland representatives are in favour of the Order.

Mr. THOMPSON

Does the hon. And gallant Member mean area or number?

Colonel CHAPMAN

I mean both number and area, because the Division of Houghton-le-Spring has a greater area in Sunderland than the Division of Sunderland itself. The senior Member for Sunderland (Mr. Thompson) said he wished that some agreement could have been reached. That no agreement has been reached is entirely due to the Sunderland Corporation, for the gas company throughout have endeavoured to come to terms. In the first place, they met a sub-committee of the Sunderland Town Council and agreed terms, but they were not confirmed by the Corporation. They then applied to the Board of Trade for an Order, but the Board told them to go back and see again if they could not come to terms with the Corporation, and the Corporation said they could only discuss them provided there was no additional dividend to be allowed to the shareholders. The hon. Member for Sunderland has claimed that it will be an extra ½ per cent. dividend paid away which has not been worked for, as if it has not been worked for when the company, by its own initiative, has been able to get a supply of coke oven gas and bring it seven miles to get the benefit of it.

The hon. Member also said that in another town not very far away they are supplying gas at 2d. a them cheaper. That is true, and it is the town of Middles brough, but there the works of Messrs. Dorman, Long, and Company, which supply that coke oven gas, are alongside the gas works. There is no difficulty in getting it there. The hon. Member's principal objection is that there is no opportunity for a revision of this Order, and he is afraid that if they got more coke oven gas, the shareholders might get a greater dividend, but it is not possible, because they are getting the maximum amount of gas with which the colliery can supply them or is likely to be able to supply them. But even if they were able to get sufficient gas to reduce the price by 2d. a them, it would mean that the consumers would get £55,000, the employes £10,000, and the shareholders only £6,000, and even then the shareholders, on the actual money which they have put into the company, would not be getting more than 7 per cent. Is there to be no incentive to industry in order to try and get the best out of modern methods?

Mr. THOMPSON

How does the hon. Gentleman arrive at his figures?

Colonel CHAPMAN

The basic dividend at present is 6 per cent. If there were a reduction of 2d., that would mean an extra 2¼ per cent. The capital of the gas company is £300,000 upon which dividend is paid. The shareholders have paid another £50,000 upon which no dividend is paid, so that the extra amount they have put in is £350,000; 8¼ per cent. on £300,000 is equal to 7 per cent. on £350,000. The hon. Member for Sunderland said that this was not a suitable time to give a basic price, as it was in a depressed area. We all remember him speaking a few weeks ago on behalf of the depressed areas. He is attempting to-night to put this corporation and the ratepayers to another heavy expense. They have already been forced to pay between £5,000 and £6,000 in litigation, every penny of which will have to be paid by the ratepayers or the consumers. That £6,000 is equivalent to 2d. on the rates, and yet the hon. Member is asking that other areas in the country shall give some of their gas to help to depress Sunderland. I hope that the House will approve of this Order. It is a fair return for a company which for a hundred years has been an example to the gas industry and the country. It has always produced gas at a low rate, and the consumers throughout have had a benefit which no other town in the country except Middlesbrough has had.

12.8 a.m.

Mr. McKEAG

I hesitate to join in the difference that has unfortunately arisen between the two hon. Members who represent Sunderland, but as the hon. and gallant Member for Houghton-le-Spring (Colonel Chapman) has spoken, there does not seem to be any reason why I as representing an adjacent division should not intervene. I support the Amendment on broad and general grounds. I support what has been said by the senior Member for Sunderland (Mr. Thompson). It is obvious the Sunderland Gas Company is a monopolistic concern, and when we are dealing with such a concern, which is vested with statutory powers, it is essential that we should be vigilant to ensure that there is no abuse of those privileges, or at any rate, no possibility of those privileges being abused. The Sunderland Corporation is to be congratulated on the step it has taken on behalf of the inhabitants of Sunderland. The senior Member for Sunderland has sufficiently demonstrated the possibility that, if the Order stands in its present form, the danger may arise that Sunderland Gas Company may allocate certain of its profits to dividends which should rightly be allocated towards a reduction in the price of gas. Surely that is the main argument against the Order standing in its present form. As I understand it, the only request now being made by the senior Member for Sunderland is that this Order should be referred to a Select Committee for examination, and I submit that that is an entirely reasonable request.

12.11 a.m.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Dr. Burgin)

The House will gather that not every Member who has spoken is familiar with the facts and arguments in this case. It is always regrettable, partly because it is after 11 o'clock and for other reasons if there is a dispute on the submission of a Gas Order, but in this case I think I shall have little difficulty in satisfying the House that none of the fears and alarms expressed are well grounded, that the interests of the consumers and the public have been closely investigated and safeguarded by the Board of Trade, that there is no substance whatever in this Amendment, and that the Order ought to be allowed to go through in the form in which it is presented. There is a dispute between the senior Member for Sunderland (Mr. L. Thompson) and the Board of Trade on two matters. Parliament delegates to the Board of Trade the control of the conditions under which the monopoly of the manufacture and distribution of gas is to be exercised by the gas companies. The Sunderland Gas Company approached Parliament for an Order, asking that the price of gas should be 7d., a figure which was reduced to 6½d., and afterwards to 6d. The whole circumstances of the basic price, dividends and other conditions were most elaborately thrashed out by a Select Committee of another place. There were arguments, counsel were heard and the whole matter was completely canvassed.

It is after all that investigation and expenditure that the senior Member for Sunderland comes to this House to suggest that the matter should be reinvest gated, with further expenditure by another Select Committee. Why? Because, it is said, if this Order is allowed to go through the gas company could distribute a higher dividend than they do at present. I hold an undertaking from the Sunderland Gas Com- pany that for a period of two years from the 1st July, 1933, they will not pay a higher dividend than their existing maximum dividend. That is a complete answer to the first point. That deals with the distressed area.

Mr. L. THOMPSON

Only for two years.

Dr. BURGIN

If Sunderland is still distressed at the end of two years, the hon. Member can come to me again.

Sir STAFFORD CRIPPS

You will not be there.

Dr. BURGIN

That is not a reason why the hon. Member should not come to me.

Mr. THOMPSON

Will you deal with the 27 of a penny? Why was not that considered?

Dr. BURGIN

I wanted to deal with the dividend first. The Board of Trade takes power to revise the basic price if circumstances arise beyond the control of the gas company. That, and the conditions are all set out in Clause 14 of the Order. The differences between the Sunderland Corporation and the Board of Trade is that we take the view that the provision as to taking coke oven gas when it can be supplied is within the control of the company and not outside its control. We think the company are deserving of a good mark for efficiency and enterprise in having the good sense to take coke oven gas when it is available near to and on satisfactory terms and so far from penalising them we want to encourage them. It would be quite wrong for the Board of Trade to give any inducement to companies to continue to make gas on uneconomic lines in their own town, when plentiful supplies of coke-oven gas are ready at hand. We want to allow them to have the full benefit of enterprise and foresight, and it is because that enterprise and foresight have been shown that we are allowing the 27 pence, to which the hon. Member referred, to be taken into account.

The senior Member for Sunderland referred to the Gas Light and Coke Act, 1931, and to an Act or Order dealing with the Newcastle Gas Company. He read out a paragraph dealing with provisions in that Act or Order, which he seemed to think would be of assistance if they were incorporated in this Order. I should like to assure him that if they had been, they would not have helped him in the least. In the Gas Light and Coke Company's Act, it says that the Board may revise the basic prices under certain conditions, and it also says that the gas company may submit to the Board that any profit resulting from efficiency should not be taken into account. The Board had already notified them that they regarded the taking of coke-oven gas as a mark of efficiency. How then could it help my hon. Friend to insert that provision? I have already ruled that the taking of coke-oven gas is a mark of efficiency.

Mr. L. THOMPSON

But the difference is this: Under the revisionary Clause, the corporation would have the right to raise the question. Under the Clause in the Order the Board of Trade cannot even take any steps to alter or consider that basic price.

Dr. BURGIN

What I have said is this. The Board of Trade do not want power to revise, wherever circumstances are within the control of the company. They take power to revise in circumstances beyond the control of the company. If it should be found necessary to revise the price within the control of the company, it would need another Gas Regulation Act, for which the Board would not hesitate, if necessary, to come to Parliament. The Board of Trade, with the best wish in the world to look after the interests of all parties, have examined this matter and have come to the conclusion that justice has been done by the Order as it is.

12.19 p.m.

Sir S. CRIPPS

We are not in the least satisfied with the answer the hon. Gentleman has given, and we propose

to support the Amendment. The hon. Gentleman is obsessed with the value of the private profit-earning system, unlike the senior Member for Sunderland, who has abandoned those old views. We support him in that. We certainly think that encouragement should not be given to private interests of this sort, who own monopolies, to earn larger sums of money than are absolutely essential for maintaining business especially in circumstances such as the present, in which the company was satisfied with the 6 per cent. which Parliament thought it sufficient to allow in 1919. Now, with the vastly lower rates of interest current, they are apparently to be given an immediate opportunity of earning a greater sum. The undertaking which the hon. Gentleman has flourished is perfectly valueless. What was asked for was an undertaking not to pay more than 6 per cent. and to distribute the remainder of the earnings in remission of prices. The undertaking has been given not to distribute more than 6 per cent., but the rest will presumably be put to reserve, and, after the expiration of two years, will be entirely distributed. It is a perfectly nugatory undertaking, and I am surprised that anybody with the intelligence of the hon. Gentleman was taken in by so simple a trick. We ask the House to say that there is no validity in the hon. Gentleman's argument when he says that because this has been die-cussed somewhere else, therefore this House should not discuss it. It is a very bad reason if this House is to exercise control. I believe that the House should exercise control, and I ask them to support the Amendment.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."

The House divided: Ayes, 121; Noes, 38.

Division No. 236.] AYES. [12.22 a m.
Acland-Troyte. Lieut.-Colonel Brown, Col. D. C. (N'thl'd., Hexham) Dixon, Rt. Hon. Herbert
Adams, Samuel Vyvyan T. (Leeds, W.) Brown, Ernest (Leith) Duckworth, George A. V.
Agnew, Lieut.-Com. P. G. Browne, Captain A. C. Duncan, James A. L. (Kensington, N.)
Apsley, Lord Burgin, Dr. Edward Lesile Elmley, viscount
Atholl, Duchess of Burnett, John George Erskine, Lord (Weston-super-Mare)
Balley, Eric Alfred George Caporn, Arthur Cecil Fox, Sir Gilford
Bateman, A. L. Cayzer, MaJ. Sir H. R. (Prtsmth., S.) Fuller, Captain A. G.
Beauchamp, Sir Brograve Campbell Chapman, Col. R.(Houghton-le-Spring) Gfedhill, Gilbert
Beaumont. M. W. (Bucks., Aylesbury) Christie, James Archibald Gower, sir Robert
Bird, Ernest Roy (Yorks., Skipton) Clarry, Reglnaid George Greene, William P, C.
Borodale, Viscount Clayton, Sir Christopher Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Bossom, A. C, Cook, Thomas A. Guinness, Thomas L. E, B.
Boulton, W. W. Courthope, Calonel Sir George L- Guy, J. C. Morrison
Bowyer, Capt. Sir George E. W. Crookshank, Capt. H. C. (Gainsb'ro) Hanley, Dennis A.
Braithwaite, J. G. (Hillsborough) Cruddas, Lieut.-Colonel Bernard Harbord, Arthur
Broadbent, Colonel John Davies, Maj.Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil) Hellgers, Captain F. F. A.
Hope, Capt. Hon. A. O. J. (Aston) Morrison, William Shephard Stones, James
Hornby, Frank Nall, Sir Joseph Storey, Samuel
Howard, Tom Forrest Nation, Brigadier-General J. J. H. Strickland, Captain w. F.
Howitt, Dr. Alfred S. Nicholson, Godfrey (Morpeth) Sucter, Rear-Admiral Murray F.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.) Peat, Charles u. Sutcllfle, Harold
Hunter, Capt. M. J. (Brigg) Penny, Sir George Thomson, Sir Frederick Charles
James, Wing.-Com. A. W. H. Petherick, M. Thorp, Linton Theodore
Jamleson, Douglas Pike, Cecil F. Todd, A. L. S. (Kingswinford)
Jesson, Major Thomas E. Ramsay, Capt. A. H. M. (Midlothian) Touche, Gordon Cosmo
Kerr, Lieut.-Col. Charles (Montross) Ramsay, T. B. W. (Western Isles) Turton, Robert Hugh
Law, Richard K. (Hull, S.W.) Ray, Sir William Ward, Lt.-Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)
Liddall, Walter S. Robinson, John Roland Ward, Irene Mary Bewick (Wallsend)
Mabane, William Ropner, Colonel L. Wells, Sydney Richard
MacAndrew. Lieut.-Col. C. G. (Partick) Rots Taylor, Walter (Woodbridge) Weymouth, Viscount
McConnell, Sir Joseph Runge, Norah Cecil Whyte, Jardine Bell
McCorquodale, M. S. Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth) Williams, Herbert G. (Croydon, S.)
McKle, John Hamilton Rutherford, John (Edmonton) Wills, Willrid D.
Maclay, Hon. Joseph Paton Rutherford, Sir John Hugo (Liverp'l) Wilson, Lt.-Col. Sir Arnold (Hertl'd)
Makins, Brigadier-General Ernest Salt, Edward W. Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Manningham-Buller, Lt.-Col. Sir M. Sandoman, Sir A. N. Stewart Wise, Alfred R.
Margesson, Capt. Rt. Hon. H. D. R. Slater, John Womersley, Walter James
Marsden, Commander Arthur Smith, Sir J. Walker- (Barrow-in-F.)
Merrlman, Sir f. Boyd Smith, R. W. (Ab'rd'n & Kinc'dine, C.) TELLERS FOR THE AYES.-
Mills, Major J, D. (New Forest) Somervell, Donald Bradley Sir Victor Warrender and Mr.
Mitchell, Harold P. (Br'tl'd & Chlsw'k) Sotheron-Estcourt, Captain T. E. Blindell.
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh) Spencer, Captain Richard A.
NOES.
Adams, D. M. (Poplar, South) Grenfell, David Rees (Glamorgan) McKeag, William
Aske, Sir Robert William Groves, Thomas E. Mainwaring, William Henry
Banfield, John William Grundy, Thomas W. Mailalleu, Edward Lancelot
Cocks, Frederick Seymour Hirst, George Henry Milner, Major James
Cripps, Sir Stafford Holdsworth, Herbert Price, Gabriel
Dagger, George Jenkins, Sir William Roberts, Aled (Wrexham)
Davies, David L. (Pontypridd) John, William Smith, Tom (Normanton)
Dobbie, William Kirkwood, David Tinker, John Joseph
Edwards. Charles Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George Williams, Edward John (Ogmore)
Evans, David Owen (Cardigan) Lawson, John James Williams, Thomas (York, Don Valley)
Evans, R. T. (Carmarthen) Logan, David Gilbert
Foot, Dingle (Dundee) Lunn, William TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton) Macdonald, Gordon (Ince) Mr. Thompson and Sir Wilfrid
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. Arthur McEntee, Valentlne L. Sugden.

Lords Amendments considered accordingly, and agreed to.

Resolved, That the draft of a Special Order proposed to be made by the Board of Trade under the Gas Undertakings Acts, 1920 and 1929, on the application of the Sunderland Gas Company, which was presented on the 15th day of March and published, be approved, subject to the following modifications:— Section 3, page 2, line 20, after 'added limits,' insert 'together with so much of such portions of the added limits.' Section 3, page 2, line 21, leave out 'and the added limits,' and insert 'as are outside the county boroughs of Sunderland as constituted at the date of this Order.' Section 3, page 2, line 29, leave out 'April,' and insert 'July.' Section 19, page 11, after Sub-section (3), insert,— Provided that the amount so credited shall not be applicable in or towards increasing the dividend for any year on the ordinary stock of the company beyond that which would be payable for that year if one-eighth of the sum calculated pursuant to paragraph (1) of section sixteen (Division of surplus profits) of this Order were applied for the benefit of the holders of ordinary stock.' Section 21, page 12, after Sub-section (3), insert,— (4) The amount standing to the credit of the contingencies and renewals fund of the company at the prescribed date shall be credited to the renewal fund authorised by this section. (5) As from the prescribed date Section one hundred and twenty-two of the Companies Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845, shall cease to apply to the company.'