§ Order for Second Reading read.
§ 10.6 p.m.
§ The Secretary of State for Scotland (Mr. Colville)I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."
I think all Scottish Members will agree that if this relief is to be afforded it should be afforded to Scotland as well, but a separate Bill is necessary because of the difference between the respective valuation and rating laws of the two countries. This Bill is a one-Clause Bill and Sub-sections (1) and (2) provide that no regard shall be had in ascertaining the value of lands and heritages for the purposes of rating, to any additional room or any structural alterations or improvements made solely for the purposes of air-raid protection. Sub-section (3) similarly exempts from rating any separate subjects so used. The first Sub-section deals with the case of owner-occupied property, and property let on long leases, and the second Sub-section with property held on short tenancies or leases. I ought to add that I sent a copy of the Bill to the three associations of Scottish local authorities as soon as it was printed. That was at the end of last week, but I 1654 have not yet received any representations from them. I shall, of course, pay great attention to any observations they may make.
§ 10.9 p.m.
Mr. J. J. DavidsonI agree with the Secretary of State that Scotland must be treated like the rest of the country, and I would commend that statement to hon. Members in regard to other legislation affecting Scotland. I want to ask what assurance we have that this provision with regard to air-raid protection will not be exploited by employers? It may be that employers may decide that places which have been used in the past for the convenience of workers shall be set aside as part of the air-raid precautions scheme, and thereby deprive their employés of facilities which they have at present. What assurance have we that this will not be done? Certain recreation facilities are granted by employers, and the employers may decide to take part of a recreation ground for air-raid protection. In doing that they are taking away an established privilege from their employés. That may affect many municipal undertakings as well.
§ Mr. ColvilleI do not think that question arises on this Bill, which deals only with the relief from rating. I do not think that the hon. Member's fears are justified, but I will look into his point, and if there is any substance in it I will deal with it at a later stage.
§ Bill committed to a Committee of the Whole House for Monday next.—[Mr. Furness.]