HC Deb 09 October 1944 vol 403 cc1526-9
Mr. W. S. Morrison

I beg to move, in page 64, line 24, leave out from beginning to the first "a", in line 28, and insert: Notwithstanding anything in sub-paragraph (1) of this paragraph, no notice to treat shall be deemed to be served on any person in respect of an interest being either— (a). The purpose of the paragraph is to enable purchasing authorities to choose whether they will compulsorily acquire an interest which will shortly expire, or whether they will wait until after the determination of the interest. Subparagraph (3) of paragraph 1 will provide that, in the case of those interests, there will be no automatic notice to treat. It is a technical point, but that is the effect of it.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made:

In page 64, line 30, leave out "under."

In line 31, leave out from "for," to "still," in line 32, and insert: an interest greater than a minor tenancy but having, at the date when apart from this provision notice to treat would be deemed by virtue of the said sub-paragraph (1) to be served on the owner of the tenancy."—[Mr. W. S. Morrison.]

The Solicitor-General

I beg to move, in page 64, line 33, after "period" insert "longer than a year."

The Amendment deals with a small technical point under Section 121 of the Lands Clauses Act, connected with what is a tenancy of one year.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made:

In page 64, line 40, leave out from beginning, to end of line 41.

In page 65, line 11, leave out "sub-paragraph," and insert "paragraph."

In line 26, leave out sub-paragraph (2).—[Mr. W. S. Morrison.]

Mr. Silkin

I beg to move, in page 65, line 48, leave out "two months", and insert "one month."

It is assumed in this Schedule that a compulsory purchase order has been made and that it is essential that the expedited procedure should apply. By that time, there will have probably been two public notices in the Press and presumably a public inquiry, and the owner has, therefore, had ample notice, on the application for a compulsory purchase order, that it is desired that the procedure should be expedited and should apply in those circumstances. The Amendment is designed to enable the local authority to get possession in one month instead of two months. I submit that in these cases, where the Minister has already been satisfied as to the expedited procedure, one month is quite sufficient. May I refer to the next Government Amendment, which goes together with the one I am moving and in which the Minister seeks power to extend or to reduce the period? I should not expect him to increase the time, nor do I think it reasonable that the period one month should be reduced. If my hon. Friend accepts the Amendment the next one would automatically fall.

The Solicitor-General

Here, for the first time for quite a considerable time, there is a difference of approach between my hon. Friend and myself. He prefers the flat period of one month and thinks it would work in all cases. We prefer a maximum of two months, with power to shorten in cases where that would appear obviously to be better. We believe that we shall achieve greater flexibility. We have agreed that in most cases one month will cover it.

Mr. Silkin

Would the Solicitor-General agree to leave out the power to extend the period, as I would be quite satisfied if two months really remained the maximum, with power with the Minister to reduce the period in proper cases? This Sub-section enables the Minister to extend the period as well.

8.15 p.m.

The Solicitor-General

My hon. Friend is quite right, and I do not mean to shirk the point. I hope I did not unintentionally convey a false position. We feel that there might be certain circumstances where someone with a small shop, or something of that kind, has particular difficulties in clearing out, in which there ought to be an extension. I hope my hon. Friend will consider this point, and consider our point of view. I think that is the first time I have used that argument. We have considered it very carefully. We feel there might be cases of hardship and we do not want these to suffer. My hon. Friend may accept it with certainty that the last thing we desire is to give any encouragement to delay in the matter.

Mr. Silkin

If my hon. and learned Friend says that in the majority of cases one month would be adequate, why does he not accept this Amendment, seeing that he has the power in the next Sub-section to increase the period of one month where necessary? It would be much simpler to say one month with power to increase where necessary. If he will accept this, we shall all be happy.

The Solicitor-General

Perhaps my hon. Friend will allow me to consider that point. I came down fully convinced of the justice of my own case, but I am always ready to look into any representations that are made. Perhaps my hon. Friend will leave it like that. I have explained our general attitude—we desire flexibility —but he has put forward quite a reasonable point, and obviously we ought to consider it.

Mr. Silkin

In view of what the Solicitor-General has said, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendments made: In page 67 line 12, leave out from beginning to "shall," in line 13.

In line 47, after "thereof," insert: and (except where he retains possession of the document as mortgagee or as trustee or otherwise in a fiduciary capacity) an undertaking for safe custody thereof. In line 48, after "acknowledgement," insert "and undertaking."—[Mr. W. S. Morrison.]

Schedule, as amended, agreed to.