HC Deb 14 July 1954 vol 530 cc602-4
Mr. Molson

I beg to move, in page 8, line 33, to leave out "next following subsection," and to insert: provisions of this section. Again, this is a drafting Amendment, designed to make quite clear what was already the effect of the words, that the Minister's power to make orders revising charges is to be subject to the provisions of the whole of Clause 6, and not merely to the provisions of subsection (3) of that Clause.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Molson

I beg to move, in page 8, line 42, at the end, to insert: (i) the Minister shall not vary any charge other than those to which the application relates, except after consultation with the undertakers and such other persons, or such bodies representative of other persons, appearing to him to have a substantial interest as may appear to him appropriate. In Committee my hon. Friend the Member for Harwich (Mr. Ridsdale) moved to leave out the words "whether or not." I indicated then that we were generally sympathetic to the idea that we should so amend the Bill, but that the words he proposed would not be appropriate. This Amendment ensures giving effect to what my hon. Friend asked for and what was acceptable to the interests concerned.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Molson

I beg to move, in page 9, line 16, to leave out "the undertakers are required by statute," and to insert: immediately before the commencement of this Act, or, in the case of an undertaking such as is referred to in paragraph (f) of subsection (1) of this section, immediately before the coming into force of the order therein mentioned, the undertakers were required by any statutory provision then in force. Again, this is purely a drafting Amendment. During the Committee stage another Amendment was moved by my hon. Friend the Member for Harwich (Mr. Ridsdale) to add proviso (3) to subsection (2) of Clause 6 and this was accepted. This Amendment carries out the intention of the Amendment in its application to an undertaking in respect of which an order is made under paragraph (f) of subsection (1) of the Clause.

Mr. Hale

Would the hon. Gentleman tell us what is the meaning of paragraph (f)? This is an obscure and difficult Clause, one we are all trying to master, and I have not been able to understand what is the class that can be brought in under paragraph (f). Without that knowledge the Amendment is meaningless.

During the Second Reading debate the hon. Gentleman gave a clear explanation of Clause 9 and said that there had been at that time some opposition to the tenor of the Clause from a number of municipal corporations. I gather that opposition is still maintained, and Oldham is one of the towns covered by this Clause and has an undertaking which is clearly covered. If the Parliamentary Secretary would be courteous enough to seek the leave of the House to answer this question—

Mr. Speaker

Order, order. The rule against speaking twice does not apply to an hon. Member who moves an Amendment on the Report stage to a Bill which has been considered in Standing Committee.

Mr. Hale

I am much obliged, Mr. Speaker, I had forgotten for the moment that all democratic institutions have class distinctions. Under the circumstances, there is no need for me to urge the Parliamentary Secretary to do this, although I shall be grateful if he will do so.

Mr. Molson

The Clause deals with the revision of charges by independent harbour undertakings, and subsection (1) deals with the general categories of undertakings. There are particular categories in which the Minister is able to lay it down, for example, in the case of some undertakings which have two different characters, that the undertaking may be treated separately as regards this Clause.

Paragraph (f) of the subsection provides that the Minister may from time to time by Order declare to be a class of undertakings certain parts of undertakings which, in respect of other activities, come under other Clauses of the Bill.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Molson

I beg to move, in page 9, line 46, to leave out: if so required by the Minister. This is consequential upon an Amendment moved in Committee by my hon. Friend the Member for Harwich (Mr. Ridsdale) which we accepted. He proposed a rough-and-ready procedure which would reduce the amount of work required in the case of an application. At first, the Government proposed a more elaborate procedure but, having ascertained that those who are most likely to be affected were prepared to accept this rough-and-ready procedure, we are prepared to accept it. The Amendment is intended to give full effect to what was then proposed.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. Molson

I beg to move, in page 10, line 4, to leave out "twenty-eight," and to insert "forty-two."

The interests concerned have represented to us that 28 days would not allow sufficient time for the lodging of objections accompanied by grounds of objection, particularly in cases where objection is lodged by a body which is representative of a number of persons. There are cases, for example, where a committee meets only once a month, or something of that kind. It is at the request of the Dock and Harbour Authorities' Association and the Traders' Dock and Harbour Co-ordinating Committee that we move the Amendment to increase the period of time during which objection may be lodged.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 10, line 12, after "objection," insert: or, where the order would vary any charge other than those to which the application relates, by any person or body with whom he has consulted in pursuance of paragraph (i) of the proviso to subsection (2) of this section."—[Mr. Molson.]