HC Deb 04 May 1937 vol 323 cc1012-4

4.32 p.m.

Mr. Turton

I beg to move, in page 18, line 12, to leave out "undue."

This Clause was the subject of long deliberation in Committee, and it is one of those Clauses which have changed a great deal in their passage through the House. As originally introduced, the Commission were entitled to make a survey and they could alter any rent or toll that they liked. The Minister has devised a new method in order to stop the work of the Livestock Commission being too cumbrous and he has given us this new proviso which, however, only enables the Commission to act when the rent or toll is not only increased but increased unduly. In the Committee, drawing attention to what would happen when market premises had received a monopoly under the terms of the Bill, he said it would be quite wrong for them to increase their charges because the Commission had given them a monopoly. I share the Minister's view in that, and I think this part of the Bill will be very unpopular should it lead to any increase of market rent and toll charges. Why should a livestock market be able to take advantage of the monopoly that we are granting them? Why should those who send their cattle to market have their charges raised? I do not think this is a very large concession to ask for.

Major Hills

I beg to second the Amendment.

4.34 p.m.

Mr. Ramsbotham

I do not think that the omission of this word would in practice make a very great difference. On the other hand, if it were omitted, the significance of the Clause might not be appreciated to the full. For instance, it enables the Commission to make an order limiting the charges that may be made by a market owner to any person using the premises—an auctioneer for example—but they cannot make an order of the kind unless they are satisfied that it is necessary to prevent persons who may have an interest in the premises taking undue ad vantage of the position as the result of the regulation of the market. It is possible that in the lapse of time an increase of rent might be reasonably made, or the owner might make improvements to the premises. He must not take undue advantage but, on the other hand, you cannot say that in no circumstances can an increase in rent be justified. I do not think there is a great deal in the point and it does not make arty very great practical difference, but in order to emphasise the significance of it, I think it is as well to leave the words as they are.

4.36 p.m.

Mr. H. G. Williams

I should like to support the Minister on this point. The whole inception of this part of the scheme is that certain people are to take some advantage because, if they are not, why under Clause 16 (6) are we going to levy on them because of the advantage that they have had from the Act? The whole conception is that there will be some increase in the volume of their trade. The word "undue" implies that, if they profiteer—to use the current phrase of the day—they are wrong, but if they get a normal increase of business as the result of this, it is what is expected and what the Bill is for.

Amendment negatived.