HC Deb 10 June 1936 vol 313 cc334-6

10.11 p.m.


I beg to move, in page 30, line 23, after "allotment," to insert: or which belongs to a local authority within the meaning of the Local Loans Act, 1875, or is held by any statutory undertakers for the purposes of their undertaking. The purpose of this Amendment is to meet representations that have been made that the provision with respect to statutory undertakings should be brought into line with other Statutes. Advantage has been taken of the opportunity to give a definition to statutory undertakers.

10.12 p.m.


I take it that the hon. and learned Gentleman is not only specifying what he means by statutory undertakers but that he is eliminating paragraph 2 on page 30 of the Schedule. The paragraph says: The Secretary of State shall not confirm a compulsory purchase order authorising the purchase of any land which belongs to any local authority within the meaning of the Local Loans Act, 1875, or to any statutory undertakers, unless the authority or undertakers, as the case may be, consent. The owners of statutory undertakings must give their consent. I take it that that is the principle of the Bill as it now stands, and that what the hon. and learned Gentleman is doing is taking away the necessity to secure the assent or consent of the undertakers.

10.14 p.m.


No, there was a certain amount of discussion going on and the right hon. Gentleman cannot quite have followed what I said. Perhaps I made my explanation too brief. In the Bill as it stands, the prohibition of the purchase of land belonging to local authorities and statutory undertakings is contained in paragraph 2, and is qualified by the proviso, which appears at the top of page 31, that the consent is not to be unreasonably withheld. By the Amendment, the prohibition is taken out of paragraph 2 and is put back to line 23, in paragraph 1. It is there made absolute, so that there shall not be a purchase of such land, and the proviso will come out. The Amendment is, therefore, more favourable to local authorities and statutory undertakers than the original Bill. The only other point to which I think it is necessary to call attention is that we have inserted a definition of "statutory undertakers" in line with the other definitions.


Can the Attorney-General say who it is that will decide what are archaeological remains?


I am afraid I cannot say straight off whether there is some definition, perhaps, in some other Bill, but I will look into the matter, and, if it can be cleared up, I will see that it is cleared up.


It occurs to me that there might be some opportunity for people who desire to prevent the development of an aerodrome to use this provision for the purpose.


I am much obliged.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made: In page 30, leave out line 27, and insert: 2. In this Part of this Schedule—

In line 35, leave out "and."

In line 38, at the end, insert: and (d) the expression 'statutory undertakers' means any persons authorised by any enactment or statutory order to construct work, or carry on any railway, canal, inland navigation, dock, harbour, tramway, gas, electricity, water, or other public undertaking.

In line 39, leave out paragraph 2.—[The Attorney-General.]

Schedule as amended, agreed to.