§ 54. Sir W. Davisonasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will inform the House under what Regulation 1932 and by what procedure can a person whose iron fencing has been removed by the Government for war purposes obtain compensation in respect of the cost of replacement of some form of fencing to protect his property, either now or after the war, apart from any payment made to him in respect of the metal contents of the fencing removed?
§ Sir K. WoodThere is no Regulation which provides for the replacement or the payment of the cost of replacement of iron fencing taken under Regulation 50(B).
§ Sir W. DavisonWhy is a person whose fences are removed by the Government for war purposes not entitled to compensation in respect of the cost he will incur of replacing them either now or after the war, when, if other property is taken from an individual for war purposes he is entitled to compensation for replacement? Why should this exception be made?
§ Sir K. WoodI have already explained that compensation is payable and that it is not the policy to take railings used for essential purposes in connection with the land.
§ Sir W. DavisonIs the Chancellor aware that the only compensation payable is for the metal contained in the railings and that the cost of putting up a new fence to protect land or buildings is not included? Is he also aware that this serious injustice is caused by a qualification in brackets to Defence Regulation 50B (8) which limits the payment of compensation by the words
otherwise than by the provision of a substitute for the fixtures"—that is for new fencing? May I ask that these words in brackets be taken out of the Regulation?
§ Sir K. WoodI cannot agree with the hon. Member; there are a good many cases in which complete compensation is not payable.