PUBLIC SERVICE VEHICLES (BRIGHTON) (Hansard, 16 February 1948)

§ The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport (Mr. James Callaghan)
I beg to move, That the Brighton Corporation Act, 1931, Modification Order 1947 (S.F. & O., 1947, No. 2843), dated 30th December, 1947, made by the Minister of Transport under Section 91 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, as applied by Section 114 of the Brighton Corporation Act, 1931, a copy of which Order was presented on 20th January, be approved. I understand there is a desire that I should say a few words about this order, although I do not intend to detain the House for long. Section 101 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, gives a local authority permission to run public service vehicles inside their boundaries, and also outside their boundaries if they get the permission of the licensing authority in whose area they will be run. Section 114 of the Brighton Corporation Act, 1931, with which this order deals, provides that Brighton must get the consent of their neighbouring authorities before they can apply to the licensing authority for permission to run there. The Act also provides that if the Minister is satisfied that such consent need not be obtained they can go to the licensing authority even in default of the consent of the neighbouring authorities.
Brighton want to run services in an area outside the Brighton boundary. Some of their neighbouring authorities do not want Brighton to run those services. We in this House are not asked to adjudicate as to whether they should or should not; what we are asking the House to do tonight is 948 to give Brighton permission to argue their case in front of the licensing authority, and to give Hove and the other authorities concerned an opportunity of answering that case there if they desire to do so, and, we hope, reaching a right, proper, and just conclusion on the issue.

§ Mr. Marlowe (Brighton)
The Parliamentary Secretary is quite right in saying that we are not called upon to adjudicate in this matter, but what he is doing takes away what was the protection of Hove. It is true that this matter will not be decided here, but the whole object of previous legislation has been to prevent an application of this kind being made to the licensing authorities. Without this order, it would not have been possible for Brighton to have gone to the licensing authority. I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his sense of political timing. He has introduced this order in the middle of a Debate which is concerned with the redistribution of boundaries, and has ensured that it comes before the House at the time when both Brighton and Hove have the same Parliamentary representation. I have gone into the question of Hove's attitude towards this matter, and they do not desire to oppose this order at this stage. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Borough of Hove have resisted this up to this point, but they feel that the numbers against them in this House would be so overwhelming that nothing would be gained by pursuing the matter further.
I can assure the hon. Gentleman that Hove's failure to oppose this order tonight does not mean that they welcome it. It means that the Borough of Hove, with their strong Tory majority, have recognised that they are in the hands of a Government which prefers monopolistic tendencies and which, in its attitude towards local government matters, encourages the greater to swallow the smaller.

§ Mr. Callaghan
Can the hon. and learned Member tell us what the attitude of the Tory Brighton Council is on this matter?

§ Mr. Marlowe
I am speaking for Hove. It is not quite fair of the hon. Gentleman to emphasise my difficulty. The point is, as he knows, that Hove have opposed up to this point and would have continued to oppose had they felt that anything was 949 to be gained by doing so. As I have said they are actuated in their attitude by the fact that they know perfectly well that the whole tendency of the present Government is to prefer a situation in which they are dealing with large units into which the smaller ones can be swallowed up. [Interruption.] If the hon. Gentleman is going to be personal in this matter, I would remind him that there was a Question today on what was mysteriously called the acquiring of a hotel in Hove. I suppose that the hon. Gentleman is supporting his Government in that attitude, knowing that he will have no use for a hotel in Hove, because I can assure him that after this order he will not be welcome there. The hon. Gentleman has put the Hove Corporation in a position in which they are overwhelmed by numbers and realise that nothing further can be done about this, except to make their protest before the licensing, authority when the matter goes before it.