§ Sir K. WoodI beg to move, in page 26, line 4, to leave out "the whole or any part of."
These words appeared on the Order Paper as a Government Amendment. It was, however, pointed out that they would take out of contribution a large block of offices in which the undertakers leased one set of rooms. Owing to shortness of time an alternative Amendment to insert "mainly or exclusively" in line 5 was moved in manuscript, but apparently the original Amendment was moved as well.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Captain CrookshankI beg to move, in page 26, line 6, to leave out "by public utility undertakers."
There is a tremendous list of Amendments to this Clause which all really relate to the same point. Public utility undertakings are dealt with under a separate scheme and have little to do with this Bill. The reason for this provision as regards contributors is that public utility undertakings are normally rated not on Schedule A but on the basis of their profits. Since the decision was taken with regard to public utility undertakings it has been brought to our notice that there are some other forms of property which are also rated in that way and do not come suitably under the provisions for contribution in the earlier part of the Bill. The most notable cases are undertakings of mining and quarrying and there also was one of broadcast relay companies. They have to be brought in, and the gist of these Amendments is to bring them, into this Clause. There are special circumstances which may arise when we draw up a scheme about the form and the amount of contributions that mines and quarries make, and notably underground minerals may require special treatment. That will come forward later on. I hope that by all these Amendments we shall clear up the difficulty which we foresaw may arise. There is really nothing further of great importance in them.
§ Sir H. WilliamsI have tried to read all these Amendments, and as far as I can make out they improve the Clause very much, but may I repeat a request which I have already made in regard to public utility undertakings? Including the 426 many municipal enterprises, they represent a capital of about £3,000,000,000. They all know that there is to be another Bill dealing with them, but, in the meantime, they have to make financial provision for contributions in respect of a period some part of which has already passed. That is causing considerable difficulty because they do not know what their obligations will be. They want to know what reserves they will have to provide in anticipation of the Bill. I wonder whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer is yet in a position to give some indication, at least, of what the obligations will be. It is a matter which affects most municipalities in this country and a very large number of companies.
§ Sir K. WoodI shall be prepared to say something about that on the Third Reading of this Bill. I must ask the hon. Member to wait until then, when I will see what I can say.
§ The Deputy-Chairman (Colonel Clifton Brown)I do not want to disappoint the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but I must remind him that on the Third Reading of a Bill the Debate is confined to what is in the Bill.
§ Sir K. WoodThen it will have to be said in another place.
§ Amendment agreed to.
§ Further Amendments made:
§ In page 26, line 6, leave out "carrying on their," and insert "the carrying."
§ In line 7, after "undertaking," insert: "and either—
- (a)that undertaking is a public utility-undertaking; or
- (b) the contributory property was the subject of a valuation for rating purposes made by reference to the accounts, receipts, profits or output, of that undertaking;"
§ In line 10, leave out "under this Part of this Act."
§ In line 13, leave out "undertakers," and insert "undertaking."
§ In line 14, leave out "persons," and insert:
"of the following undertakings the carrying on of which is."
§ In line 15, leave out from "order" to "any," and insert "that is to say."
§ In line 19, leave out "or," and insert "and the undertaking of."
§ In line 19, leave out from "authority" to "except," in line 25.
427§ In line 26, leave out "public utility."
§ In line 27, after "undertaking," insert "being a public utility undertaking."
§
In line 30, leave out from the second "hereditament," to "no," in line 32, and insert:
is occupied mainly or exclusively for the purpose of the carrying on of an undertaking, and either—
§ In line 38, leave out "public utility undertakers," and insert "the persons carrying on the undertakings in question."
§ In page 27, leave out line 7
§
In line 7, at the end, insert
and in relation to any mining or quarrying undertaking.
§ In line 14, leave out from "undertaking," to the second "the," in line 15.
§ In line 17, at the end, insert:
§ (g) in relation to any other undertaking, such Government department as the Treasury may determine."— [Sir K. Wood.]
§ Motion made, and Question proposed,"That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."
§ Mr. R. MorganI had put down an Amendment to include toll bridges, but it was not called, and I should like to take this opportunity of asking whether they come within the category specified by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury. Toll bridges are a public utility service, and as they do not pay rates and taxes, I do not see how they are to be included in the Bill unless specially mentioned.
§ Captain CrookshankI wrote to my hon. Friend on this subject yesterday, but perhaps he did not get my letter in time. I do not think he is quite right in saying that all toll bridges do not pay rates and taxes. There are some of one sort and some of another. Also, I am not sure what are his fears on this subject. If his fear is that because they do not pay rates and taxes and, therefore, are not contributory properties under the definition of those which have to pay contribution, they will not get compensation if they are damaged, he need not have that fear. Compensation does not de- 428 pend upon whether or not you are a contributory person. You get compensation whether you are or not. It would be very nice of those concerned to want to be contributors, but I should think that most people who will get the benefits without contributing will prefer not to contribute. In any case, the compensation is there, whether they are technically contributory undertakings under the Bill or not, and I am prepared to say, on behalf of my right hon. Friend, that in the further legislation required in regard to these public utility undertakings, it may be found necessary to say something specific about tolls. We shall then have an opportunity of discussing the matter, but at the moment they do get the benefits of the Bill in the matter of compensation.
§ Sir William Davison (Kensington, South)Can the right hon. Gentleman say when it is intended to introduce this further legislation dealing with public utilities? I regret to ask that question if a statement has already been made, but I have come back as quickly as I could. It would be a great help to the public utility undertakings if they could know within the next week or two.
§ Sir K. WoodI cannot give a specific date now, but I can tell my hon. Friend that we are doing our utmost to expedite the introduction of the Bill.
§ Question, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.