HC Deb 26 July 1955 vol 544 cc1133-4

Lords Amendment: In page 10, line 42, leave out subsection (8).

10.11 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government (Mr. W. F. Deedes)

I beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.

I think that this Amendment will prove generally acceptable and that it requires but a few words of explanation from me. We have now had an opportunity of considering the decision of the Lands Tribunal in the City of Birmingham case which was mentioned in the earlier proceedings on this Clause. It is not a simple issue by any means, but the essential point in the context of this subsection is that the sinking fund provision was reduced from £300,000 claimed to £200,000.

My right hon. Friend is prepared to assume that the principles underlying that judgment will apply in parallel cases, and in those circumstances he feels that the proper course is to withdraw the subsection. I do not think I need go further than that at the moment.

Mr. G. Lindgren (Wellingborough)

On behalf of my right hon. and hon. Friends, I wish to express appreciation of the manner in which the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary have dealt with this matter. It shows some courage to withdraw a provision that was included in a Bill when it has been shown in debate and by subsequent findings that it is desirable to withdraw it. I think we should say, "Thank you, very much" to the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary for having done so.

I should like further to compliment the Parliamentary Secretary on the manner in which he held a conference with the water undertakings to which he was so courteous as to extend an invitation for me to attend following my observations in a previous debate. That sort of attitude is appreciated by hon. Members on this side of the House.

Mr. Derek Walker—Smith (Hertfordshire, East)

I do not wish to detain the House, but may I say that the attitude of the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary in listening to informed discussion in this House and adjusting the Bill accordingly is a very good instance of Parliamentary democracy?

Question put and agreed to. [Special Entry.]