HC Deb 23 June 1943 vol 390 cc1143-6
28. Mr. Foster

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works the position in relation to the payment of compensation for loss of iron railings; and is the compensation paid to the owner of the railings or the ground landlord?

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works (Mr. Hicks)

Compensation is payable in accordance with the terms of Defence Regulation 50B to persons having an estate or interest in the' fixtures, and if landlord and tenant cannot agree on the apportionment the General Claims Tribunal will decide between them. In practice, except in leases having a long unexpired term, the freeholder is normally accepted by all parties as the effective owner of the railings.

Mr. Foster

Am I to understand that the owner-occupier whose railings have been taken will be entitled to claim compensation, not the ground landlord?

Mr. Hicks

Where there is an owner-occupier, and no other possible claimant, the owner-occupier, and not the ground landlord, necessarily has the right to compensation.

Mr. Leach

Does my hon. Friend not agree that the wholesale removal of railings constitutes a great artistic improvement?

30. Mr. Colegate

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works, whether he has considered the letter from the urban district council of Oakengates to his Department; and whether he will meet the objections raised by the urban district council to the removal of certain iron railings?

Mr. Hicks

I have seen the letter referred to and a copy of the reply which was issued by my Ministry's Birmingham Office on 8th June to a letter in identical terms which was sent by the clerk of the urban district of Oakengates direct to that office. I concur in the terms of the reply, and I may add that, while every consideration will be given to the representations of the council in respect of particular railings in their area, in accordance with the general policy which has been adopted in this matter, I cannot undertake to suspend generally the taking of railings until all other sources of scrap metal of varying utility have been exhausted.

32. Sir William Davison

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works under what circumstances and by what authority was the figure of 25s. a ton fixed as the compensation payable to persons or firms whose iron railings were taken by the Government for use as scrap metal when the market price of such scrap metal was several pounds per ton, in view of the fact that Regulation 50B states that the basis of compensation payable in any case shall be the price which might reasonably have been expected to be obtained upon a sale?

Mr. Hicks

The Government authorised the offer of the sum of 25s. per ton as being a fair average price for scrap metal in situ for railings taken by requisition. The reference to Defence Regulation 50B, I observe, is incomplete, and omits the important proviso that the sale is "a sale effected immediately before the severance to a purchaser intending to sever them."

Sir W. Davison

Is my hon. Friend aware that the public generally are under the impression that 25s. a ton is the price fixed by the Government for railings and that there is no appeal against this figure?

Mr. Hicks

That is the price generally paid. I have informed the House many times that if any person thinks he is not getting the proper price there is the Claims Tribunal to which he can make application. But there is, in addition to the railings, for which 25s. a ton is paid, the cost of severance, the cost of removal, the cost of making good, and the cost of transport, which runs out roughly at £3 8s. a ton.

Sir W. Davison

Is my hon. Friend aware that the owner of the railings sells the railings as they are, and that the value of railings in situ is more than 25s. a ton?

Professor Savory

Am I allowed to put up any form of gate to prevent my garden being overrun by II bullocks?

Mr. Hicks

Are they Irish bulls?

Professor Savory

They are being sent Over to feed you.

Mr. Hicks

I am very grateful.

33. Sir W. Davison

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works the procedure for obtaining such compensation as will enable persons whose railings have been taken by the Government to erect adequate fencing after the war to replace such railings, including the cost of replacement?

Mr. Hicks

If the hon. Member will refer to paragraphs (4) to (8) of Defence Regulation 50B, he will see that the Regulation does not provide for the payment of compensation based upon the cost of replacement of the railings or upon the provision of a substitute fence.

Sir W. Davison

Surely an individual who has to fence in his property for various reasons, including such as that given by my hon. Friend the Member for Queen's University, Belfast (Professor Savory), is entitled to some compensation towards the cost of replacement having regard to the fact that Government action has left his property open?

Mr. McKinlay

Is it the intention of the Government to spread this confiscation of people's property throughout every activity in the country?

Mr. Hicks

I am only interpreting the Defence Regulation.

Sir W. Davison

Surely my hon. Friend will think it reasonable that people should be entitled to receive compensation for the cost of replacement of railings which have been compulsorily removed by the Government; and should not steps be taken to alter the Regulation if it does not permit of compensation being paid in these cases?

Mr. Hicks

That is a matter for the House of Commons. I am only interpreting Regulation 50B.

Commander Agnew

Is it the hon. Gentleman's intention to introduce legislation which will provide such compensation?