§ Lords Amendments again considered.
Lords Amendment: In page 5, line 32, at end, insert:
(2) For the year beginning on the sixteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and fifty-nine, and subsequent years the rights of salmon fishings to which this subsection applies shall, subject to the following provisions of this section, be deemed for the purpose of making up any valuation roll to be agricultural lands and heritages:
Provided that nothing in this section shall affect any right of a district fishery board to require the assessor to value and enter such rights of salmon fishing in the valuation roll for the purposes of fishery assessments only.
(3) The last foregoing subsection—
(4) Any dwelling-houses, bothies, net stores, drying greens or other corporeal lands and heritages occupied or used in connection with rights of salmon fishing to which subsection (2) of this section applies shall, for the purpose of making up the valuation roll for the year beginning on the sixteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and fifty-nine and any subsequent year, be treated as lands and heritages which are neither industrial nor agricultural.
§ Question again proposed, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
§ 6.4 p.m.
§ Mr. Lawson
When this matter came up in the first place before the Committee upstairs the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland argued his case very persuasively and received a great deal of sympathy from hon. Members on both sides of the Committee. Since then, however, there has been a lot of discussion backwards and forwards on this point. The matter was raised subsequently by a new Clause, when it was debated much more fully. On the second occasion as on the first it was rejected very firmly by the Government. On the second 475 occasion, at the very end, the spokesman for the Government, the hon. Member for Craigton (Mr. J. N. Browne) suggested that he would look at it again, but it was rejected very firmly.
Subsequently, it came before another place and was argued there and firmly rejected by the spokesman on behalf of the Government. When put to the vote, as we have heard, there was a tie of 24 to 24 and it meant that from that time the policy had been changed. I know how sincere the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland is about this matter, but I would say to him that this House is having an Amendment imposed upon it by another place and I would object on that basis.
There are two other points which are very important. They have been dealt with, but I must repeat them. The concession which would be made by acceptance of this Amendment would be at the expense, not of the Government, but of local authorities—at the expense of the ratepayers. If there is a case for treating this kind of salmon fishing on the same basis as agriculture—and I agree that there was a case for it to be dealt with as agriculture is dealt with—it should be on the basis of Government assistance. If the Government could subsidise agriculture there is no reason why, if this industry is so vitally important, the Government should not give the industry a subsidy if it is required, but this concession would be made entirely at the expense of local ratepayers.
The acceptance by the Secretary of State of the suggestion made by local authorities that there should be some quid pro quo in terms of an increase in the general grant, as has been pointed out, could not benefit local authorities, except to the extent of coppers, and they would lose rates from salmon fisheries. The aggregate general grant could be increased but would not help poor local authorities which would have to give up substantial rates if the fisheries were treated in the way suggested by the Amendment.
Another point which I think would carry a great deal of weight with the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland is the question of rent. If it is so difficult to make a profit out of these fishings, 476 why should the rental be so high? If any concessions have to be made, why should not they be made by the landlord or the Crown, which in this case may be acting as the landlord? That seems to be the key point.
§ Sir D. Robertson
The rents are fixed in the fairest possible manner by a free tenant in a free society. They are put up when the leases fall in. There is secret balloting and those who offer the highest price get the fishery. There could not be a fairer system.
§ Mr. Lawson
When making this gamble and putting in a rent which will enable them still to make a profit, the rates to be paid should be borne in mind. If the rates are wiped out, the Crown and the landlord will benefit even more. The thought will be, "We do not have to pay rates so we can add a little more to the rental bid." The local authority would be losing rates and either the Crown or the private landlord would gain a higher rent. Much as I sympathise with the hon. Member and the many arguments he has advanced, I think that if he looks at it from this point of view he will see that there is a great deal of substance in the arguments advanced from this side of the House, arguments which have convinced me that my right course of action is to support my hon. Friends in the Lobby against this Amendment.
§ Mr. Willis
My hon. Friend the Member for Motherwell (Mr. Lawson) has covered some of the points in respect of rent. It is obvious that in making an offer a person would calculate that he would make a profit. We are being asked to subsidise someone's mistaken gamble. Someone has gambled and lost and we are asked to give a subsidy.
§ Mr. Lawson
We are not being asked to subsidise the loss, but the local ratepayers are being asked to do so.
§ Mr. Willis
We are being asked to subsidise to this extent. I asked the Secretary of State if the aggregate amount was to be increased to include this and he said "Yes". To that extent we subsidise it. My hon. Friend the Member for Motherwell pointed out that if this procedure were adopted and the aggregate general grant was divided in accordance with the Second and Third Schedules local ratepayers would be subsidising it. Then the argument would be valid.
477 We on this side of the House are equally anxious as anyone to provide employment for people in the Highlands, or anywhere else. It is not because we are not anxious to do that that we oppose this Amendment, but we think this is the wrong way of assisting and giving employment where probably it is necessary in certain cases.
What do we do here? We say that we will give a subsidy to all salmon net fishings in Scotland, whether or not they are profitable. They might be making very handsome profits, but they are to be subsidised. Surely, there is something wrong with that? I thought that hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite did not believe in subsidies, in any case, but if they are prepared to sacrifice their principles to the extent of agreeing with subsidies, there is something wrong with giving a subsidy to salmon net fishing which can very well afford to pay its share of the rates.
What is really the kernel of the problem, apparently, is that these salmon net fishings, which, for various reasons, last year or over a certain number of years, have not paid their way or have made exceedingly small profits, are, as the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland (Sir D. Robertson) said, the right of the Crown. It is the Crown which decides the rents of these fisheries in practically all cases, because, by their very nature, they are conducted in the estuaries and round about, and not elsewhere; in other words, in Crown waters.
If that is so, surely, it is not beyond the wit of the Crown to say to the people concerned "You are losing money, and should ask for an adjustment in the rent". If we take the two cases quoted in another place during the debate referred to, one finds a rent, as my hon. Friend says, in the Sutherland and Beauly area, of £8,000. That is in the Dornoch, Beauly and Moray Firth area. Surely, it is not beyond the wit a the Government to devise some method of reducing that rent if it is too high, and if, in fact, people are losing money, without subsidising the whole of it.
I want to ask the Government a question about this. I do not think the Secretary of State was very familiar with this when I asked him the amount which was to be paid. I notice that he turned to the Joint Under-Secretary for informa- 478 tion, so I ask whether we might have the advice of the learned Solicitor-General for Scotland to interpret Clause 15 and to explain to the House how, in fact, the Government are to compensate local authorities for the losses which they suffer, bearing in mind what Clause 15 provides.
Clause 15 covers the transitional period, and this is the period in which, according to the Secretary of State, the local authorities are to be compensated for losses. Clause 15 says specifically that, after the first year, they must suffer one-tenth of their loss, and, thereafter, such percentages as the Government themselves may determine for the whole of the local authorities, and not simply those affected by the salmon net fishing. How is this to be done under the terms of Clause 15? I should like to know that, and probably the Solicitor-General for Scotland is the best person to give us an answer.
I should also like some assurance—because the Secretary of State did not appear to be very sure about this—that, in fact, these additional moneys that are to be provided to compensate local authorities will not be paid at the expense of other local authorities, but will come from the Treasury or somewhere else. In other words, in addition to the general grant already fixed under the Bill, there will be an additional sum from the Treasury to compensate them for their losses. We should have some assurance about that.
§ 6.15 p.m.
§ The Solicitor-General for Scotland
If I reply briefly to the points raised, it will not be through any discourtesy, but because time is getting on. I will try to deal with the points that have been raised.
May I start with the point made by the hon. Member for Edinburgh, East (Mr. Willis) on the question of additional grants and how they will be divided? I quite agree that the additional money available will not go entirely in proportion to the authorities which lose under this Clause. We are all agreed on that, and there is no getting away from it, but the total amount available coming from the Treasury—and I could not give the figure to the nearest pound or even thousand pounds—will, broadly speaking, correspond in the aggregate to what the local 479 authorities will lose if this Clause is adopted. I want the House to be quite clear on that.
As regards compensation for loss, as the hon. Member for Edinburgh, East knows, Clause 15 deals with the transitional period, and deals with it on a very minor scale—one-tenth to start with and scaling up after that. In the first two years, that will certainly help local authorities, particularly between 1959 and 1961, when the scheme begins to operate. I should say that the Association of County Councils, which has brought this matter up, asked merely that the total amount of the general grant should be adjusted to take account of the losses of rateable value, and has not asked that there should be a proportionate allocation to fit into compensating any particular authority for the losses which occur.
Now may I come to the two main points?
§ Mr. Willis
Before the right hon. and learned Gentleman leaves that subject, may I point out to him that this is quite different from what we were told by the Secretary of State, who said that the local authorities were not going to lose over this matter during the transitional period?
§ The Solicitor-General for Scotland
Collectively, they will not, within the odd thousand pounds or so, and that, I think, is what my right hon. Friend said.
May I now come to the two main questions which have been asked? The first is why have the Government supported this Amendment, and the second is why have they done it at this stage. I want to point out that the Amendment which we are now considering is a very different one from that considered in Committee upstairs, which was moved, I think, by my hon. Friend the Member for North Angus and Mearns (Sir C. Thornton-Kemsley), for this reason. The derating which we propose to apply will apply only to salmon fisheries themselves, and not to the dwelling houses, bothies and drying greens.
Consequently, we have to remember that, having gone into the figures, we found, as my right hon. Friend said, that the salmon net fishings are rated on a very high proportion of their actual catch 480 and turnover. Indeed, if the Bill went through as it stood originally, that would be doubled, and the industry would be very heavily hit. This is not a novel or new matter. If I may go back sixty years, before either the hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Ross) or I were born, I can tell the House that, for certain purposes, in the 1890s salmon fishings were treated as agricultural subjects. I am not sure that it is not a very good thing to go back to what our forefathers did in those days.
§ Mr. Ross
The Secretary of State stated that when they did go into the figures, this was what they found. Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman look back to the speech delivered for the Government in Committee, when they asked the hon. Gentleman to withdraw his Amendment? It was said that the Government would consider it between then and Report stage. When did they get the figures, because this was not done on the Report stage?
§ The Solicitor-General for Scotland
I will be perfectly honest with the hon. Gentleman. As far as I recollect, we had the rough figures at an early stage, but we had the difficulty of sorting out the problem of allocating them between the salmon fishings proper and the bothies. I do not want to go into legal technicalities, but certain assessors have assessed the salmon fishings and the bothies as a single entity, and others have split them. Although we had a fairly broad view of the figures, it was not what I would call a very accurate one—I am being perfectly honest about it.
During the Committee stage, we had a broad view—I do not say that we had not—but, having got the broad view, and having looked at the question of trying to split the salmon rights proper as against the heritable property and so on, it was only at a fairly later stage that we could make a decision as to what ought to go into this Bill. That is why the Amendment came on at a fairly late stage. I would merely commend the Amendment to the House. I have a feeling that hon. Gentlemen opposite do not like it very much, but we all have our points of view. I have tried, briefly, and to the best of my ability, to reply to the points raised.
§ Question put, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment:—482
§ The House divided: Ayes 223, Noes 174.
§ [Special Entry.]483
|Division No. 204.]||AYES||[6.21 p.m.|
|Agnew, Sir Peter||Gurden, Harold||Milligan, Rt. Hon. W. R.|
|Aitken, W. T.||Hall, John (Wycombe)||Molson, Rt. Hon. Hugh|
|Alport, C. J. M.||Harris, Frederic (Croydon, N. W.)||Moore, Sir Thomas|
|Anstruther-Gray, Major Sir William||Harris, Reader (Heston)||Morrison, John (Salisbury)|
|Arbuthnot, John||Harrison, Col. J. H. (Eye)||Nabarro, G. D. N.|
|Armstrong, C. W.||Harvey, Sir Arthur Vere (Macclesf'd)||Nairn, D. L. S.|
|Ashton, H.||Harvey, John (Walthamstow, E.)||Neave, Airey|
|Atkins, H. E.||Heald, Rt. Hon. Sir Lionel||Nicholson, Sir Godfrey (Farnham)|
|Baldock, Lt.-Cmdr. J. M.||Heath, Rt. Hon. E. R. G.||Nicolson, N. (B'n'm'th, E. & Chr'ch)|
|Baldwin, Sir Archer||Henderson, John (Cathcart)||Noble, Michael (Argyll)|
|Barlow, Sir John||Henderson-Stewart, Sir James||Nugent, G. R. H.|
|Batsford, Brian||Hesketh, R. F.||Oakshott, H. D.|
|Bell, Philip (Bolton, E.)||Hicks-Beach, Maj. W. W.||O'Neill, Hn. Phelim (Co. Antrim. N.)|
|Bennett, Dr. Reginald||Hill, Rt. Hon. Charles (Luton)||Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. W. D.|
|Bevins, J. R. (Toxteth)||Hill, Mrs. E. (Wythenshawe)||Orr-Ewing, Charles Ian (Hendon, N.)|
|Bidgood, J. C.||Hill, John (S. Norfolk)||Page, R. G.|
|Biggs-Davison, J. A.||Hobson, John (Warwick & Leam'gt'n)||Peel, W. J.|
|Bingham, R. M.||Holland-Martin, C. J.||Peyton, J. W. W.|
|Birch, Rt. Hon. Nigel||Hope, Lord John||Pickthorn, K. W. M.|
|Bishop, F. P.||Hornby, R. P.||Pike, Miss Mervyn|
|Body, R. F.||Hornsby-Smith, Miss M. P.||Pilkington, Capt. R. A.|
|Boothby, Sir Robert||Horobin, Sir Ian||Pitt, Miss E. M.|
|Bossom, Sir Alfred||Horsbrugh, Rt. Hon. Dame Florence||Pott, H. P.|
|Braithwaite, Sir Albert (Harrow, W.)||Howard, Gerald (Cambridgeshire)||Powell, J. Enoch|
|Bromley-Davenport, Lt.-Col. W. H.||Howard, Hon. Greville (St. Ives)||Price, David (Eastleigh)|
|Browne, J. Nixon (Craigton)||Howard, John (Test)||Prior-Palmer, Brig. O. L.|
|Bullus, Wing Commander E. E.||Hughes Hallett, Vice-Admiral J.||Ramsden, J. E.|
|Burden, F. F. A.||Hughes-Young, M. H. C.||Redmayne, M.|
|Butler, Rt. Hn. R. A. (Saffron Walden)||Hurd, A. R.||Rees-Davies, W. R.|
|Cary, Sir Robert||Hutchison, Michael Clark (E'b'gh, S.)|
|Channon, Sir Henry||Hutchison, Sir James (Scotstoun)||Renton, D. L. M.|
|Chichester-Clark, R.||Hylton-Foster, Rt. Hon. Sir Harry||Roberts, Sir Peter (Heeley)|
|Clarke, Brig. Terence (Portsmth, W.)||Iremonger, T. L.||Robertson, Sir David|
|Cole, Norman||Irvine, Bryant Godman (Rye)||Ropner, Col. Sir Leonard|
|Conant, Maj. Sir Roger||Jenkins, Robert (Dulwich)||Russell, R. S.|
|Cooke, Robert||Jennings, J. C. (Burton)||Scott-Miller, Cmdr. R.|
|Cordeaux, Lt.-Col. J. K.||Johnson, Dr. Donald (Carlisle)||Shepherd, William|
|Corfield, Capt. F. V.||Johnson, Eric (Blackley)||Smyth, Brig. Sir John (Norwood)|
|Crowder, Sir John (Finchley)||Joseph, Sir Keith||Spearman, Sir Alexander|
|Crowder, Petre (Ruislip—Northwood)||Keegan, D.||Speir, R. M.|
|Cunningham, Knox||Kerby, Capt. H. B.||Stanley, Capt. Hon. Richard|
|Currie, G. B. H.||Kerr, Sir Hamilton||Steward, Harold (Stockport, S.)|
|Dance, J. C. G.||Kershaw, J. A.||Steward, Sir William (Woolwich, W.)|
|Deedes, W. F.||Kirk, P. M.||Storey, S.|
|Digby, Simon Wingfield||Lambton, Viscount||Stuart, Rt. Hon. James (Moray)|
|Donaldson, Cmdr. C. E. McA.||Lancaster, Col. C. G.||Studholme, Sir Henry|
|Doughty, C. J. A.||Langford-Holt, J. A.||Summers, Sir Spencer|
|Drayson, G. B.||Leather, E. H. C.||Teeling, W.|
|du Cann, E. D. L.||Leavey, J. A.||Temple, John M.|
|Dugdale, Rt. Hn. Sir T. (Richmond)||Legge-Bourke, Maj. E. A. H.||Thomas, Leslie (Canterbury)|
|Eccles, Rt. Hon. Sir David||Lindsay, Hon. James (Devon, N.)||Thompson, Kenneth (Walton)|
|Eden J. B. (Bournemouth, West)||Lindsay, Martin (Solihull)||Thompson, R. (Croydon, S.)|
|Elliott, R. W. (Ne'castle upon Tyne, N.)||Linstead, Sir H. N.||Thornton-Kemsley, Sir Colin|
|Errington, Sir Eric||Lloyd, Maj. Sir Guy (Renfrew, E.)||Tiley, A. (Bradford, W.)|
|Erroll, F. J.||Longden, Gilbert||Tilney, John (Wavertree)|
|Farey-Jones, F. W.||Low, Rt. Hon. Sir Toby||Turner, H. F. L.|
|Fell, A.||Lucas, Sir Jocelyn (Portsmouth, S.)||Turton, Rt. Hon. R. H.|
|Finlay, Graeme||Tweedsmuir, Lady|
|Fisher, Nigel||Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh||Vickers, Miss Joan|
|Fletcher-Cooke, C.||McAdden, S. J.||Vosper, Rt. Hon. D. F.|
|Foster, John||McKibbin, Alan||Wakefield, Edward (Derbyshire, W.)|
|Gammans, Lady||Mackie, J. H. (Galloway)||Wakefield, Sir Wavell (St. M'lebone)|
|Garner-Evans, E. H.||McLaughlin, Mrs. P.||Wall, Patrick|
|George, J. C. (Pollok)||Maclay, Rt. Hon. John||Ward, Rt. Hon. G. R. (Worcester)|
|Gibson-Watt, D.||Maclean, Sir Fitzroy (Lancaster)||Ward, Dame Irene (Tynemouth)|
|Glover, D.||MacLeod, John (Ross & Cromarty)||Webster, David|
|Glyn, Col. Richard H.||Macmillan, Rt. Hn. Harold (Bromley)||Whitelaw, W. S. I.|
|Godber, J. B.||Macpherson, Niall (Dumfries)||Williams, Paul (Sunderland, S.)|
|Gower, H. R.||Maddan, Martin||Williams, R. Dudley (Exeter)|
|Grant, Rt. Hon. W. (Woodside)||Maitland, Cdr. J. F. W. (Horncastle)||Wills, Sir Gerald (Bridgwater)|
|Grant-Ferris, Wg Cdr. R. (Nantwich)||Maitland, Hon. Patrick (Lanark)||Wilson, Geoffrey (Truro)|
|Green, A.||Manningham-Buller, Rt. Hn. Sir R.||Wood, Hon. R.|
|Gresham Cooke, R.||Markham, Major Sir Frank||Woollam, John Victor|
|Grimston, Hon. John (St. Albans)||Marshall, Douglas|
|Grimston, sir Robert (Westbury)||Mathew, R.||TELLERS FOR THE AYES:|
|Grosvenor, Lt.-Col. R. G.||Mawby, R. L.||Mr. Legh and Mr. Brooman-White.|
|Ainsley, J. W.||Hannan, W.||Pannell, Charles (Leeds, W.)|
|Allaun, Frank (Salford, E.)||Harrison, J. (Nottingham, N.)||Pearson, A.|
|Allen, Arthur (Bosworth)||Hastings, S.||Peart, T. F.|
|Awbery, S. S.||Hayman, F. H.||Pentland, N.|
|Bacon, Miss Alice||Healey, Denis||Plummer, Sir Leslie|
|Balfour, A.||Herbison, Miss M.||Prentice, R. E.|
|Bence, C. R. (Dunbartonshire, E.)||Hobson, C. R. (Keighley)||Proctor, W. T.|
|Benn, Hn. Wedgwood (Bristol, S. E.)||Holman, P.||Rankin, John|
|Benson, Sir George||Holmes, Horace||Redhead, E. C.|
|Beswick, Frank||Holt, A. F.||Reeves, J.|
|Bevan, Rt. Hon. A. (Ebbw Vale)||Houghton, Douglas||Reynolds, G. W.|
|Blackburn, F.||Howell, Denis (All Saints)||Robens, Rt. Hon. A.|
|Blyton, W. R.||Hoy, J. H.||Roberts, Albert (Normanton)|
|Boardman, H.||Hubbard, T. F.||Roberts, Goronwy (Caernarvon)|
|Bonham Carter, Mark||Hughes, Emrys (S. Ayrshire)||Robinson, Kenneth (St. Pancras, N.)|
|Bottomley, Rt. Hon. A. G.||Hughes, Hector (Aberdeen, N.)||Rogers, George (Kensington, N.)|
|Bowden, H. W. (Leicester, S. W.)||Hynd, J. B. (Attercliffe)||Ross, William|
|Braddock, Mrs. Elizabeth||Irvine, A. J. (Edge Hill)||Royle, C.|
|Broughton, Dr. A. D. D.||Irving, Sydney (Dartford)||Shinwell, Rt. Hon. E.|
|Brown, Rt. Hon. George (Belper)||Isaacs, Rt. Hon. G. A.||Silverman, Julius (Aston)|
|Brown, Thomas (Ince)||Jeger, George (Goole)||Simmons, C. J. (Brierlsy Hill)|
|Burke, W. A.||Jeger, Mrs. Lena (Holbn & St. Pncs, S.)||Slater, J. (Sedgefield)|
|Butler, Herbert (Hackney, C.)||Jenkins, Roy (Stechford)||Smith, Ellis (Stoke, S.)|
|Callaghan, L. J.||Jones, Elwyn (W. Ham, S.)||Soskice, Rt. Hon. Sir Frank|
|Carmichael, J.||Jones, Jack (Rotherham)||Sparks, J. A.|
|Champion, A. J.||Key, Rt. Hon. C. W.||Spriggs, Leslie|
|Chetwynd, G. R.|
|Coldrick, W.||King, Dr. H. M.||Steele, T.|
|Collick, P. H. (Birkenhead)||Lawson, G. M.||Stewart, Michael (Fulham)|
|Cove, W. G.||Lee, Frederick (Newton)||Stonehouse, John|
|Craddock, George (Bradford, S.)||Lee, Miss Jennie (Cannock)||Stones, W. (Consett)|
|Cronin, J. D.||Lever, Leslie (Ardwick)||Strachey, Rt. Hon. J.|
|Crossman, R. H. S.||Lindgren, G. S.||Summerskill, Rt. Hon. E.|
|Cullen, Mrs. A.||Lipton, Marcus||Sylvester, G. O.|
|Darling, George (Hillsborough)||Logan, D. G.||Taylor, Bernard (Mansfield)|
|Davies, Rt. Hon. Clement (Montgomery)||Mabon, Dr. J. Dickson||Taylor, John (West Lothian)|
|Davies, Harold (Leek)||McAlister, Mrs. Mary||Thomson, George (Dundee, E.)|
|Davies, Stephen (Merthyr)||McCann, J.||Thornton, E.|
|de Freitas, Geoffrey||MacColl, J. E.||Timmons, J.|
|Dodds, N. N.||MacDermot, Niall||Viant, S. P.|
|Dugdale, Rt. Hn. John (W. Brmwch)||McInnes, J.||Watkins, T. E.|
|Ede, Rt. Hon. J. C.||McKay, John (Wallsend)||Wells, William (Walsall, N.)|
|Edwards, Robert (Bilston)||McLeavy, Frank||West, D. G.|
|Edwards, W. J. (Stepney)||MacPherson, Malcolm (Stirling)||Wheeldon, W. E.|
|Evans, Albert (Islington, S. W.)||Mallalieu, E. L. (Brigg)||White, Mrs. Eirene (E. Flint)|
|Evans, Edward (Lowestoft)||Mann, Mrs. Jean||Wilcock, Group Capt. C. A. B.|
|Fernyhough, E.||Marquand, Rt. Hon. H. A.||Wilkins, W. A.|
|Finch, H. J.||Messer, Sir F.||Willey, Frederick|
|Fitch, Alan||Mitchison, G. R.||Williams, Rt. Hon. T. (Don Valley)|
|Foot, D. M.||Monslow, W.||Williams, W. R. (Openshaw)|
|Fraser, Thomas (Hamilton)||Morris, Percy (Swansea, W.)||Williams, W. T. (Barons Court)|
|Gaitskell, Rt. Hon. H. T. N.||Mort, D. L.||Willis, Eustace (Edinburgh, E.)|
|Gibson, C. W.||Moyle, A.||Woodburn, Rt. Hon. A.|
|Gordon Walker, Rt. Hon. P. C.||Neal, Harold (Bolsover)||Woof, R. E.|
|Greenwood, Anthony||Noel-Baker, Rt. Hon. P. (Derby, S.)||Yates, V. (Ladywood)|
|Grey, C. F.||Orbach, M.||Younger, Rt. Hon. K.|
|Griffiths, Rt. Hon. James (Llanelly)||Oswald, T.|
|Grimond, J.||Owen, W. J.||TELLERS FOR THE NOES|
|Hall, Rt. Hn. Glenvil (Colne Valley)||Paling, Will T. (Dewsbury)||Mr. Short and Mr. Deer.|
|Hamilton, W. W.||Palmer, A. M. F.|
§ 6.30 p.m.
Further Lords Amendments agreed to: In line 39, after "shall" insert:
subject to the provisions of this section".—[Special Entry.]
§ In line 40, leave out "change" and insert "changes".—[Special Entry.]
§ In line 40, leave out "subsection" and insert "provisions of this section".—[Special Entry.]
§ In line 41, leave out "change" and insert "changes".—[Special Entry.]
In page 6, line 4, at end insert:
(6) Where any such corporeal lands and heritages as are specified in subsection (4) of this section, being lands and heritages occupied or used as so specified, are in any valuation roll in force at the commencement of this Act included in the valuation of the rights of salmon fishing in connection with which they are occupied or used, they shall, notwithstanding anything in this section, be so included in the valuation rolls for the year beginning on the sixteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and fifty-nine and the next following year, and subsection (2) of this section shall for the purposes of those years have effect in relation to them as if they were rights of salmon fishing to which that subsection applies."—[Special Entry.]