CLAUSE 10.—(Miscellaneous provisions.) (Hansard, 24 February 1948)

Mr. Edwards
I beg to move, in page 8, line 33, at the end, to insert: (3) Section thirty-seven of the principal Act (which requires statutory water undertakers to provide a domestic supply for new buildings) shall have effect as if references therein to the laying or providing of mains included references to the construction of service reservoirs. Doubts have been expressed whether the obligation imposed by this Clause on water undertakers to lay mains in advance of development might not also require them to provide service reservoirs, without additional payment by the developers towards the costs. This was never the intention, and the object of this Amendment is to remove any doubts about the matter.

Mr. Edwards
I beg to move, in page 8, line 34, at the beginning, to insert: Subsection (6) of Section nine of the principal Act (which precludes the constitution under that Section of any joint board which could be constituted under Section six of the Public Health Act, 1936) and. This is a continuation of what will be effected by Clause 2 of the Bill. It provides that an order establishing a joint board of local authorities supplying water under the 1936 Act must be made under Section 6 of that Act. If the joint board 1888 also requires powers for compulsory acquisition of water rights, an order under Section 26 of the Water Act, 1945, is also necessary. It means two stages and two separate orders. This will enable the Minister to make an order under Section g of the Water Act, and to use the powers in Clause 2 of this Bill for combining the two stages by one order.

Mr. Edwards
I beg to move, in page 8, line 44, at the end, to add: (5) In accordance with the foregoing provisions of this Act, Section twenty-three of the principal Act shall have effect subject to the following amendments:

(a) at the beginning of paragraph (i) of the proviso to Subsection (1), there shall be inserted the words 'except as otherwise provided by the Water Act, 1948,' and the words 'land or,' in that paragraph shall be omitted;

(b) in Subsection (2) the words 'other than paragraph 8,' shall be omitted and at the end of the Subsection there shall be added the following proviso:

'Provided that paragraph 8 of that Schedule shall not apply except in the cases provided by the Water Act, 1948'. This Amendment is purely drafting, except for the last words in paragraph (a). These words relate to the new Clause, and I think it might be convenient to take the discussion on that new Clause.

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller
I am not quite certain that I understand what the Parliamentary Secretary has said in regard to paragraph (a). As I read it, the effect will be that the proviso to Section 23 (1) of the 1945 Act will not apply so as to prevent the reduction of compensation water where this Bill expressly provides that under the 1945 Act no order can be made varying the amount of compensation water. The effect of this Amendment is that such an order can be made in the cases provided for by this Bill. I do not see any provision for varying compensation water, nor do I observe any Clause upon the Order Paper by which the right hon. Gentleman takes powers to do that. I must confess that, having read this through several times, I have not observed any provisions giving the right hon. Gentleman the power to do the very thing which I opposed last Friday in connection with an Amendment moved by the hon. Member for West Woolwich (Mr. Berry). That was by order to vary the amount of the compensation water which would be allowed to flow 1889 down the rivers. I think it would be convenient if we had an explanation from the right hon. Gentleman of what is meant by the words: except as otherwise provided by the Water Act, 1948. The second part of the Amendment seems to be quite unobjectionable and quite clear in its significance.

§ Mr. J. Edwards
I think that the hon. and learned Gentleman has taken us further than we need go on this matter. Perhaps, if I explained it as I see it, the hon. and learned Gentleman will ask me again if I have not made myself plain. Paragraph (a) raises further consideration of the proviso to Section 23 (1) of the main Act which provides, among other things, that an order under paragraph (a) of that Subsection shall not empower the applicants to acquire compulsorily any land or water rights. Clause 2 of the Bill, on the other hand, provides that an order under Section 23 (1, a) may—I emphasise may—authorise the compulsory acquisition of water rights in certain cases, namely, where an order is made on the application of persons who are not already statutory water undertakers who are constituted as such by the order. Accordingly, it is no longer true without qualification that an order under Section 23 cannot authorise the compulsory acquisition of water rights. The words: Except as otherwise provided by the Water Act, 1948"— are included in order to avoid that apparent conflict. That explanation, although it may seem involved, amounts to the fact that this is a drafting Amendment consequential on our having adopted Clause 2.

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller
I am grateful to the Parliamentary Secretary for that explanation. It has made quite clear to me the object of the insertion of these words, but as the proviso to Section 23 (1) of the 1945 Act will now run, it is possible to interpret that proviso as if the words except as otherwise provided by the Water Act, 1948 also cover part of the proviso which deals not with the acquisition of water rights but the variation and compulsory variation of the quantity of compensation water. As a matter of arrangement it is 1890 open to that possible view. It is clear from what the hon. Gentleman has said that so far there is nothing in this Bill or on the Order Paper in the right hon. Gentleman's name whereby he does take power to reduce the amount of compensation water compulsorily. In those circumstances, while I hope the hon. Gentleman will have another look at the wording to avoid the possibility of confusion, I need say no more with regard to this Amendment.

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller
Could the hon. Gentleman give us some explanation of Subsection (1) of this Clause, which provides that: Every statutory water undertaker, not being a local authority or a joint committee or joint board appointed jointly by two or more local authorities, shall make to the Minister such reports and returns and give him such information with respect to their functions as he may require, or as may be required by either House of Parliament. I can well understand it being expressly provided that statutory undertakers should make such returns and reports as are required by the House of Commons, but this Clause, as drafted appears to me to go further than that, and to say that every statutory water undertaking shall be under the obligation to give the Minister such information as may be required by either House of Parliament. It is not impossible, if this Clause goes into the Bill, to say that the right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Health will be under an obligation to answer any Questions which are put to him in this House with regard to statutory water undertakings. In my view, these words about giving him such information as may be required by either House of Parliament cannot be confined to reports and returns that are already dealt with in the earlier part of this Subsection.
Therefore, if the last part of this Clause has any meaning at all, it has a meaning which I welcome, and which is a departure from the attitude of the Government with regard to the Transport Act and other Measures relating to the nationalised industries. Its meaning is that the Minister is undertaking the 1891 responsibility of answering such Questions as may appear on the Order Paper with regard to the functions of water undertakings. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will be able to confirm the view I have advanced as to the meaning of these words. If I am wrong, I hope he will explain to the Committee what they are intended to mean and to what, in fact, they apply.

§ Mr. J. Edwards
Once again the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Daventry (Mr. Manningham-Buller) has taken us for a longer ride than we need go. I am not tonight going to enter into discussions about the extent to which Ministers of the Crown should be answerable for public utilities, and it would be foolish of me to follow him up that garden path. All that this new Clause does is to fill up one or two gaps and make workable provisions that we have had previously. There is no matter of principle raised here so far as I am aware. This particular Clause is exactly the same as one which we have in the Local Government Act, 1933, from which it has been taken.

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller
Would the hon. Gentleman seek to answer the question I put to him in all seriousness? As this Subsection commences by dealing with the making of reports and returns, obviously the last part means something in addition to that. If the reports and returns required by either House of Parliament are put on one side, what is the object of putting in this Clause the words after "reports and returns" such information with respect to their functions … as may be required by either House of Parliament. Before we part from this Clause, we ought to be given an indication by the hon. Gentleman as to what those words are intended to cover. Are they entirely meaningless, or are they intended to mean what I suggest is their natural meaning—that the Minister of Health should answer questions? We should not be left in doubt about this, and I must press the Parliamentary Secretary to try to meet the point and explain what is the meaning and purpose of putting in these words in addition to "reports and returns".

§ Mr. J. Edwards
I do not think it is any part of my business tonight to start 1892 talking about what questions the Minister of Health will answer in this House. These words are perfectly fair. They say what they mean—that the water undertakings herein referred to must give the Minister such information as to their functions as he asks for, and any information that may be required by either House of Parliament. That is perfectly clear, but I do not think that on the basis of that I should then be led into a discussion as to the extent to which my right hon. Friend will answer Questions in the House.

§ Major Legge-Bourke (Isle of Ely)
This raises a very important matter of principle. So far as I can understand it, any information required by the House of Commons might quite easily relate to day-to-day administration. The Parliamentary Secretary ought to be able to say tonight whether, if we put down Questions asking the Minister of Health how these undertakings are carrying on their business of day-to-day administration, he will be prepared to answer or not. I also hope the Parliamentary Secretary will tell us what he meant when he said earlier that this Clause of the Bill was designed to cover one or two gaps which had been noticed arising out of a previous Local Government Act. Would he say what those gaps are and exactly how this Clause covers them?

§ Mr. Joynson-Hicks
I have every sympathy with the Parliamentary Secretary who quite obviously does not want to reply to the question put to him, but it is up to him to explain his own Bill. He has not given the Committee a satisfactory explanation of what these words really mean or are intended to cover. As I see it, where there are statutory water undertakers who are required to give whatever information the Houses of Parliament require, that requirement can only be met by the statutory water undertakers through the Minister. If it is made through the Minister, why should he have in addition a special power provided in the Subsection for him to obtain such information as he may himself require?
What is this diversity of information which may be required either by the Minister on the one hand or by the Houses of Parliament on the other? Why should it be necessary to have this double channel by which information can be extracted from the statutory water undertakers in 1893 addition to their regular routine reports and returns? Surely there must be some meaning in it, even if the hon. Gentleman does not want to commit himself to say whether it enables him to accept responsibility to Parliament for the policy as well as the administration of the statutory water undertakers? There must be some other reason for which he is taking this rather exceptional power to obtain information in three different ways—the reports and returns, information which he himself may require, and information which the Houses of Parliament may require. I do not recall having seen so wide a provision in any other statutory enactment, although I may well be wrong there, but surely there must be some explanation, and the hon. Gentleman has not yet given it to the Committee.

§ Mr. Berry
I am a shade impressed by the somewhat contradictory attitude of hon. Members opposite. While I have been sitting here listening to them, I have been reminded of the old words: We have piped unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned unto you, and ye have not lamented. They have criticised when a Minister would not give them information. Under this Bill the Minister of Health appears to have a perfect thirst for information, quite legitimately, to enable him and his Department to deal with the insatiable appetite of hon. Members for information, and yet they are now complaining of that—

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller
No.

§ Mr. Berry
The hon. and learned Member for Daventry (Mr. Manningham-Buller) may not complain in that way, but other hon. Members do. If the Minister of Health has this thirst for information which will be of service to his Department and enable it to function properly, as well as satisfying the insatiable appetites of hon. Members, I do not see why they should quarrel about it at this time of night, unless it is the phase which comes over us at a quarter to ten in the evening when we want to be a bit facetious.

§ Mr. J. Edwards
I still feel that to pursue the point as to the particular category of questions which the Minister of Health will answer on this matter does not get us anywhere. I do not need to 1894 tell hon. Members of the wide powers which the Minister of Health has in this matter of water supplies, and that in respect of these powers, he is answerable to the House of Commons. To show how wide his powers are, I will read Section 1 of the 1945 Act which says: It shall be the duty of the Minister to promote the conservation and proper use of water resources and the provision of water supplies in England and Wales and to secure the effective execution by water undertakers, under his control and direction, of a national policy relating to water. I do not think the Minister can exercise those powers or be answerable to the House in respect of them, as he is at present, unless he is able to get this information. Nor do I think the House can control the Minister unless it, too, has the residual power of getting information if it wants it. I do not want to avoid a challenge. Hon. Members on both sides of the Committee know what is the practice of the Minister of Health in respect of any Question on water undertakings put to him. This new Bill does not alter that position in any way, but it shows how different this type of public utility is from some other public utilities which we are not in a position to discuss tonight.

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller
The hon. Member for West Woolwich (Mr. Berry) showed that I have not made myself clear or that he has failed to appreciate my argument. I am not complaining in the least of the Minister having every power to obtain information from the statutory water undertakers as to the exercise of their functions. Indeed, it is quite clear, from the earlier part of this Clause, that the Minister can call for any reports and returns he desires. I thought I asked a perfectly simple question, but even now we have not got an answer to it. It was this: recognising that the Minister could get any reports or returns he wanted, what did the further words of this Clause cover, namely, give him such information with respect to their functions as he may require, or as may be required by either House of Parliament. This House can call for reports and returns, but this means something in addition to that, as I read it. Does it mean, having regard to the wide power that the right hon. Gentleman has, that, if I put down a Question about a statutory water undertaking, we shall be able to 1895 get the answer to that Question instead of the usual evasiveness that we have had in regard to Questions on transport undertakings? I rather understood from the hon. Gentleman's last remark, when he referred to the residual power in this House of getting information if it wants to, that he was admitting that if a Question is put by, say, the hon. Member for West Woolwich as to the operation of a particular statutory water undertaker, having regard to the power which the right hon. Gentleman is taking here, in addition to reports and returns, he will indeed convey the information to the hon. Member who asks for it from whichever side of the House he comes.

§ Mr. J. Edwards
I hoped we could settle this amicably. We must distinguish here between a Question which may be put down and one which the Minister within the functions given to him by Statute will have to answer. In so far as he is in possession of material arising out of his functions, doubtless that material will be available to any hon. Member. On the other hand, there is the kind of material which the House by specific Resolution says that it wants. If the hon. Gentleman puts down the requisite Motion and that is carried by the House, then the undertaking must provide the information, but it cannot be expected that a simple Question to the Minister is going to produce the kind of information which is indicated in the last part of the Subsection.

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller
Surely, a Motion of the sort to which the hon. Gentleman referred would be a Motion for a report or a return and would not, therefore, come into the last part of the Subsection at all?