HC Deb 04 May 1937 vol 323 cc1074-83
Mr. W. S. Morrison

I beg to move, in page 48, line 18, to leave out from "shall," to the end of line 31, and to insert: consider any objections to the draft order which have been duly made to him, and may, after holding such inquiries (if any) as he thinks fit, make such modifications in the draft order as he may, after consultation with the Commission, consider desirable: Provided that—

  1. (a) where an objection to the draft order has been duly made by any person appearing to the appropriate Minister to be affected thereby, and has not been withdrawn, the said Minister, unless he considers the objection to be frivolous or irrelevant or unless the objection has been 1075 met, shall, before taking any further action with respect to the draft order, direct the holding of an inquiry with respect to the objection and consider the report of the person holding the inquiry; and
  2. (b) if the appropriate Minister decides to make any modifications in the draft order, he shall cause notice of the proposed modifications to be published in such manner as he thinks best adapted for informing persons affected."
This Amendment affects the provisions to be complied with in connection with the making of livestock market orders. There are subsequent Amendments in my name to the later Schedules, and I can say at once that the object of all these Amendments is the same, namely, to bring the procedure in all the Schedules into line and to make similar provisions apply as to the making of various orders and bye-laws. There was some criticism in Committee on variations in the Schedule as already drafted, and it was generally felt that it would be desirable to bring them into line, and I think we have succeeded. As this is a fresh Amendment I would say a word or two as to the effect it will have. There are, of course, differences between the various instruments, and there must be corresponding differences in the Schedule applying to their making, revocation and so on; but the general effect of this Amendment, and those which succeed it to a similar tenor, is to make mandatory upon the Minister the holding of an inquiry when objections are still outstanding, unless those objections are frivolous or irrelevant. Before that an inquiry might be held by the Minister if he thought necessary, but there was a general desire, so long as it appeared that there was a substantial objection outstanding, that the Minister should be compelled to hold an inquiry, and I have acceded to that.

There is no direction in the Amendment that the inquiry should be local. Some hon. Members have moved an Amendment to that effect, but let me explain the difficulty about putting into the Statute that the inquiry must be local. Remember that a livestock market order may cover a very wide territory, embracing two or three counties, and when we put words into a Statute we have always to envisage the possibility of local proceedings arising from them. If the making of a draft livestock markets order led to an inquiry covering the counties of Cornwall and Devon, and we chose Exeter as the seat of inquiry, that might be held local to one county but not to the other.

Mr. Deputy-Speaker (Captain Bourne)

There is an Amendment on the Order Paper in the name of the hon. and gallant Member for Louth (Lieut.-Colonel Heneage) and I think we had better take this discussion on that.

Mr. Morrison

I am obliged to you, Sir, for the news that the Amendment is to be selected. May I ask your guidance? I think there was an Amendment requiring that the inquiry should be public. I do not know whether it is in here or not. The only other observation I would make on the matter is that it should not be made mandatory that the inquiry be held in public.

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

8.14 p.m.

Lieut.-Colonel Heneage

I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, in line 10, after "inquiry," to insert, "in the area to which the draft order applies."

As the Minister is aware, there was a good deal of discussion about this in the Committee, and on the whole it seemed to be favourable. But I should like the Minister, in reply, first of all to explain to us whether he can accept the Amendment, and, if he cannot, why he cannot do so. Secondly, will he give us as reassuring a statement as possible that the inquiry shall be held in the area whenever possible? Nearly always there is a request for an inquiry to be held close to the locality, and I suggest to the Minister that it would be worth while considering whether, if not in regard to this Bill, in future Bills, it would be possible to discover a form of words to avoid these constant discussions on the locality of an inquiry. It is always considered that an inquiry should take place in the centre of interest. It would save a great deal of Parliamentary time if something could be done on the lines I have suggested.

8.16 p.m.

Mr. Barnes

I beg to second the Amendment to the proposed Amendment.

While the Amendment of the Minister to the Third Schedule to some extent meets the views expressed in the Committee upstairs, I think that if he will call upon his memory he will admit that the point embodied in this Amendment found very strong support on all sides of the Committee. Upstairs the Minister advanced the same argument that he was proceeding to advance a short time ago, namely, that the insertion of a provision that the inquiry should be local would present a difficulty if a draft order covered, say, the counties of Devon and Cornwall. I am not very much impressed by the argument of the Minister. It is improbable that any market order would cover a long stretch of territory such as is represented by Devon and Cornwall, but even if that should prove to be the case, I do not consider that there is any difficulty in the Amendment which we propose.

I draw the attention of the Minister to the actual wording of the Amendment, which says "in the area to which the draft order applies" Therefore, if the draft order did, in fact, cover the counties of Devon and Cornwall, I see no difficulty in the way of such an inquiry being held in Exeter if it proved to be the most convenient centre. It would be far better to hold an inquiry affecting the market interests of Devon and Cornwall in Exeter than to hold it in London. All we desire here is not to determine, or to interfere with, the area which the draft order may cover, but to establish the principle of whether the area of the draft order shall be limited or cover a rather wide area. There would be very few market areas that would cover the area which the Minister has visualised, but if that eventuality should arise, it does not appear to destroy the principle that we have in mind.

I have a little difficulty in appreciating the obstinacy of the Minister on this point. If I felt that there was any considerable administrative difficulties in the way, I would not be prepared to press this point to the extent of a Division; but it was very significant that the Minister's thoughts were proceeding on exactly the lines upon which they proceeded upstairs, which we know convinced all Members of the Committee. He will remember that he took the very sensible view in Committee that it was undesirable to have a hasty Amendment to the Schedule, and we left it to the Minister to examine this proposal. There was fairly general anticipation that the Minister would meet this very simple point He will agree with me that agricultural opinion is rather parochial in its outlook, and the interests of local authorities would be involved here. It is very significant that the local authorities are still pressing this point. There is no substantial reason why he should refuse to accept the Amendment, which is a simple one and falls into his general Amendment and does not upset its purpose. I trust that, as the Bill has had rather an easy passage this evening and the House has been very amenable to the wishes of the Minister, at this eleventh hour he will make this small concession, upon which we place a good deal of importance.

8.23 p.m.

Mr. H. Haslam

I support the Amendment. The hon. Member for East Ham, South (Mr. Barnes) pointed out that in rural districts, though he did not perhaps put it in quite these words, they attach the greatest importance to these local inquiries. They are somewhat distrustful of bodies in Whitehall, who, with the very best intentions in the world, prepare for them schemes for their own benefit, but in which they may have very little voice. In this case we hope that the local authorities of these rural districts and small market towns will have full discussion and opportunity of presenting their case, and full notice. That matter is still in slight doubt. The Minister promised to meet us, and I am quite certain that he will. I notice that he indicates assent.

Mr. W. S. Morrison

I promised to consider it.

Mr. Haslam

This question is necessarily very important. Let me call the attention of hon. Members to the words of the Amendment: Where an objection to the draft order has been duly made by any person appearing to the appropriate Minister to be affected thereby. Those words go far to meet the view we put forward in Committee, and they would include local authorities, associations and organisations in the area. But I would point out that these draft orders, which are for the more efficient management of the marketing system, may include an order to close a market, which is a very different proposition from an order to improve a market. I submit that where it is an order for the closure of a market an inquiry should be held in the area concerned. In the small towns market day is the day on which the greater part of the people make their livelihood. Things are dead on other days, but on market days the little town is crowded with country folk, who come to do their shopping. Their livelihood largely depends on the business they do on market day. It would be a serious thing for such towns if the market was closed, and if such an order is made there should be a public local inquiry. The decision may go against them and they would be disappointed, but they have had their say and they have heard what can be said against them. Therefore, there will not be that rankling sense of injustice, which may be felt if a closing order was imposed upon them without their being able to put their own case. I hope the Minister will accept the Amendment to the proposed Amendment.

8.28 p.m.

Lieut.-Colonel Acland-Troyte

The Minister has shown himself so very hardhearted throughout the Bill that I really think we can ask him to accept this Amendment to his Amendment. It is a very small one, but very important to local people. They desire that an inquiry affecting their local market should be held in the area concerned. It has been suggested that a marketing order might be made covering Devon and Cornwall. I can imagine nothing more fatal to the success of the scheme than a proposal of that sort. It would be very inconvenient for people in Cornwall to come to Exeter and for people in Devon to go to Truro; and equally inconvenient for the parties to come to London.

8.29 p.m.

Mr. T. Williams

I hope the Minister will consider the point of view of local authorities. It has been the usual practice wherever a local authority has been affected by a Parliamentary Measure to hold a local inquiry within the area, and the Minister is guided by his inspector's report. The right hon. Member's reference to Cornwall and Devon hardly covers the point of the local authority. Unless the inquiry takes place somewhere in The area involved, it might mean that local authorities would have to send representatives to London at great cost. There is no necessity to involve local authorities in excessive costs if by the simple process of sending an inspector down to hold an inquiry into the area concerned the same results can be achieved. In addition to saving the authorities a good deal of money, they would also have the consolation of knowing that some person had examined the position on the spot. We on these benches are not anxious to hold up any marketing scheme. We want to expedite that part of the Measure and, therefore, I hope the Minister will see his way to hold such inquiries within the area involved. If the Cornish people regard Exeter as not being in their area, or the Devon people regard Truro as not being in their area, then clearly the words of the Amendment will enable the Minister to determine that it shall be held within the area involved and he will thus give satisfaction to the local authorities. The main point is that it would save sending representatives to London at some cost to local authorities.

8.32 p.m.

Mr. W. S. Morrison

I do not think any sensible Minister of Agriculture or any sensible body of officials would ever hold an inquiry except in the place where it was most convenient for those most concerned. There have been public inquiries all over the country and I have never heard of a complaint that the administration has held them at inconvenient places. Hon. Members seem to think that my illustration about Devon and Cornwall was imperfect. Let me put another point. Suppose there was a livestock markets order for Kent and Surrey and you consulted everyone where the inquiry should be held and it was unanimously decided that it should be held in London to meet the convenience of all parties concerned. It would then be said that it was not local, because the inquiry had not been held in the area to which the livestock market order applied. I do not think the House wants that.

Mr. Barnes

Does the Minister really contemplate making an order covering the whole of Kent and Surrey?

Mr. Morrison

No, I am not contemplating anything, but I am using the argument because it is possible to make such an order. We have to consider these matters in that light. What hon. Members are saying is that they really cannot trust a Minister or a Government Department to be sensible about this sort of thing and to hold an inquiry where it should be held. They wish to put into the Bill words which would fetter the discretion of the Minister in case there should he an unreasonable Minister who would use his power so as to make a nuisance of himself to everybody concerned. Do hon. Members think that these words would do that? If I had it in mind, as Minister of Agriculture, to torment these people and to put them to inconvenience, if these words were inserted and if there was a public inquiry to be held, I could put them to far more inconvenience than would be involved by making them come to London, for I could direct that the inquiry should be held on a bleak moor. [Laughter.] Hon. Members laugh because they know that no Minister would be such a fool. Nor would a Minister be such a fool as to hold in London an inquiry into some matter concerning Yorkshire or Durham.

Either hon. Members should accept the view that Ministers will administer this matter in a sensible and reasonable manner because it is to the interests of all concerned that they should do so, or they should try to put much stronger fetters on a Minister's malignity, if they proceed on the other assumption. What I am trying to do is to save hon. Members from themselves in this matter; I am trying to save them from putting words in the Bill which might be a great nuisance to everybody concerned on a future occasion. I hope hon. Members will rest content with my unqualified assurance that in every case where there is an inquiry of local interest, that inquiry will be held in a place which, by the general consent of all concerned, is the most convenient to the local inhabitants.

Mr. Gallacher

Put it in the Bill.

Mr. Morrison

The words proposed would not achieve that purpose. I have given that unqualified assurance to the House, if that is what hon. Members want. Hon. Members must believe me when I say that I tried to find a form of words which could be put in the Bill, because I know the very genuine and proper feelings which exist on this matter, but I could not find any form of words which was suitable. I hope the House and the local authorities will accept my unquali- fled assurance on this point. That is the policy which I shall certainly follow and which every succeeding Minister will follow. Hon. Members know that these inquiries have been held for years and that there has never been a complaint. If one is legislating, for example, about the alteration of the boundaries of a local authority, one can use the word "local" without fear, because it is bound to be within the area; but here, where we have this rather unmapped territory for which to legislate, the House would be well advised to rest upon my assurance and not to tie itself by words which might cause hardship in the future and prove a nuisance to the very persons we are trying to help.

8.39 p.m.

Mr. T. Williams

Do I understand the Minister to mean that it is his definite and avowed intention and purpose that, when objections are lodged and not resolved, and an inquiry takes place, it will be held at all events somewhere within the area concerned?

Mr. Morrison

Even more than that—somewhere within the area involved unless it is more convenient to those concerned to hold it outside.

Lieut.-Colonel Heneage

In view of the assurance given by the Minister, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment to the proposed Amendment.

Amendment to the proposed Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Proposed words there inserted in the Bill.

8.40 p.m.

Mr. Ramsbotham

I beg to move, in page 49, line 6, after "or," to insert: by the occupier of any premises within the said area which are used or appropriated for holding markets in respect of livestock, or by some person carrying on the business of effecting sales by auction on such premises as aforesaid, or. This Amendment is moved in accordance with an undertaking which I gave in the Standing Committee. It is designed to secure that the market owners and the livestock auctioneers shall be specifically mentioned in the Bill as persons entitled to present a memorial. In our view, as the Bill stands, the regulations mentioned in the Schedule would be sufficient to cover the interests of those persons, but in order to make assurance doubly sure we propose this Amendment so as to make it clear beyond peradventure that these regulations include the interests of the market owners and the livestock auctioneers, although of course it is inconceivable that the regulations would be so drafted as to ignore them.

Amendment agreed to.