HC Deb 21 July 1961 vol 644 cc1646-7

Lords Amendment: In page 44, line 34, at end insert: (2) For the purposes of this Act a building intersected by the circumference of the circle referred to in paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of the last foregoing section shall be treated as being outside the prohibited area.

Mr. Vane

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

The House will remember that Clause 21 prohibited after a certain date the use of land for wholesale horticultural marketing within "the prohibited area." The prohibited area is defined by Clause 53 as the land surrounding the Covent Garden Area and whose outer boundary is the circumference of a circle with a radius of three-quarters of a mile from a certain junction.

That, of course, does not follow the line of streets but a line drawn, as it were, with a pair of compasses, and it will pass through certain buildings. It is therefore right for us in the interpretation Clause to make certain whether such buildings are inside or outside the restricted area in the same way as when one is shooting on the rifle range and is shooting into the line one must know whether it is into the inner or outer circle. We are proposing that a house through which this line passes shall not be subject to the restrictions but shall rank as being outside the restricted area. This Amendment is nothing more than a definition. I hope the House will see reason in it and accept it.

12.30 p.m.

Mr. Channon

I wish to ask my hon. Friend two short questions. Has he any idea how many buildings will be affected? That must be already clear from the map. Why is this provision to come in this Clause? It does not seem to be an interpretation, but to be a new point. The Minister might have decided to take the opposite view, that these buildings should be inside the prohibited area rather than outside. I cannot see why this should come in the interpretation Clause. It should be made specifically clear what is inside and what is outside. Then we should not need a new subsection which seems not to be interpreting anything but making an entirely new point.

Mr. Vane

I think this is interpreting. It is defining what is and what is not the prohibited area, and the buildings through which the line passes. I am told that approximately fifty buildings will be involved.

Question put and agreed to.