HC Deb 29 June 1951 vol 489 cc1784-5
Colonel Lancaster

I beg to move, in page 14, line 13, to leave out from "district," to "it," in line 14.

This is an exploratory Amendment. We cannot quite see the purpose of including the words which we propose to leave out, and perhaps the Minister will give us a short explanation.

Mr. Powell

I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. Dalton

If this Amendment were inserted the effect would be that the Minister of Agriculture would no longer have to consider whether worked ironstone land was capable of being brought into productive agricultural use before operating the provisions of the Clause. I am not clear what is the intention of the Amendment. Agricultural land is defined in the Agricultural Act, 1947, and includes land which, in the opinion of the Minister, ought to be brought into use for agriculture. I would have thought that it was desirable to leave the Minister's powers in that respect unimpaired so far as this Bill is concerned.

I am the Minister primarily responsible for the operation of the Act, but it was said in Committee, and I agree, that where matters require expert agricultural knowledge, it ought to be the Minister of Agriculture who takes the decision in consultation with me. I think that this Amendment will tend to diminish his duties in that respect.

Mr. Powell

I am relieved to hear the explanation which the Minister has given. There was a fear in the minds of some of us that this Clause might be used for other extravagant operations on potential agricultural land, but it now appears from the Minister's explanation that the effect of the words which have been moved to be left out is, in fact, restrictive and that it would require a prima facie case to be made that the land is potentially agricultural land before special steps could be taken.

Colonel Lancaster

In view of the Minister's explanation, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.