HC Deb 04 July 1957 vol 572 cc1451-4

10.27 p.m.

Colonel O. E. Crosthwaite-Eyre (New Forest)

I beg to move, in page 3, line 20, to leave out "Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food" and to insert "Lord Chancellor".

We have always been most careful in this House to avoid placing responsibility upon a Minister to appoint somebody who would have to take action, and where the Minister might find himself party to something upon what the person he had appointed might have to adjudicate. The Minister of Agriculture has special responsibility for commons. That has been laid down by Act of Parliament dating back to sometime in the first half of the nineteenth century.

Therefore, if we pass the Clause it could mean that at some future time the Minister will find himself in the rather awkward position of being party to a case about which his nominee would have to try to make a fair judgment. That is something that neither side of the Committee wants to see.

My first idea, particularly after I listened to the Minister on Second Reading, was that it would be far better to choose somebody like the President of the Chartered Surveyors' Association who, by his very nature, would be divorced from any such risk when he came to his later activities.

As my right hon. Friend said, it is far from clear at the moment exactly what type of person would best fulfil the job of valuer as envisaged in the Bill. I myself was convinced that it was not possible to designate any one of the technical associations, because if one did one might well find in the light of experience of the claims that are likely to be made and the questions that are likely to be asked that one had chosen the wrong one.

Therefore, I thought it would be much better if we substituted the Lord Chancellor for the Minister. After all, the Lord Chancellor is a man known throughout the course of many years of Parliamentary experience as being one who always appoints people where there might be confusion or where it needs to be beyond reasonable doubt that the person appointed will in no circumstances in local gossip or in any other way be regarded as the nominee of a certain Minister or faction.

I was reluctant to place a further burden on the Lord Chancellor, but I felt that to safeguard the principle to which I have just referred, by preventing the House of Commons from ever appointing someone who could by way of gossip or misinformation be construed as not impartial, it was well worth while to have the Amendment. Winfrith Heath presents us with our first case of a public authority wishing to take over common land, and I think it well worth while to ask that the Lord Chancellor should be the person to appoint the valuer.

By so doing, we certainly cannot be misrepresented—I hope that in this I speak for all hon. Members—in whatever may be said later, and, above all, we shall have safeguarded the principle to which I have referred. In giving power to nominate, we shall be able to say without any question that the person has been nominated by an authority possessing no possible side or bias which can be misconstrued.

I know full well that the Minister of Agriculture has special duties in regard to commons, and at first sight it might be that he was the natural choice, but I think that just because of that, and because of his special duties in regard to commons, it would be very much better to have someone quite outside any issue which might come before the valuer.

For those reasons, I trust that the Amendment will be accepted. I am certain that it is in accordance with principles with which both sides of the House of Commons have always agreed. I am certain that it will stop any suggestion locally that the person appointed might be acting ex parte in respect of the person who appointed him.

Mr. Ede (South Shields)

I hope that I shall not embarrass the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for New Forest (Colonel Crosthwaite-Eyre), nor prejudice his case, if I congratulate him on his speech and declare my whole-hearted support for the line of argument that he has adopted.

This is a very important Measure. Although we have been told by the Minister—no one doubts his good faith in the matter—that the Bill will never he quoted as a precedent, we are dealing here with the kind of thing that has inured over centuries and will go on existing, and one can envisage some future Minister, oblivious to what is being said in Committee on this Bill, faced with a similar situation and looking to what has been done in the past, alighting on this and saying. "In 1957 they put in the Minister of Agriculture, and in 2235 I can do no better than follow what they did."

This Bill may very well have successors, not necessarily from the Atomic Energy Authority but from nationalised industries who may, for the purpose of works or for some other reason, want to acquire a considerable tract of open country and to extinguish any common rights which may exist on it; and, instead of lighting on the place where, I understand, it is very difficult to discover anybody who claims to be capable of exercising the common rights, one might very well then he dealing with a place where there might be a considerable number of people who were so involved and where it would he highly desirable that the proceedings that this valuer is to conduct should be conducted by someone whose appointment must be placed above suspicion of being the "stooge"—to use a modern word—of any of the Ministries or other parties connected with the case.

I hope, therefore, that the right hon. Gentleman will find it possible to accept this Amendment.

The Paymaster-General (Mr. Reginald Maudling)

I am grateful to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for New Forest (Colonel Crosthwaite-Eyre) for raising this point which, as he has said and as the right hon. Member for South Shields (Mr. Ede) has echoed, is an important one not only in this particular case, but as an example of a general matter that arises.

I have discussed the matter with my noble Friend the Lord Chancellor, taking into account particularly the nature of this valuer's office which is rather of a judicial or quasi-judicial character, and we are inclined to agree that the appointment might better be made by my noble Friend. Therefore, I am happy to accept the Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.