§ Lords Amendment: In page 10, line 46, leave out "constructing".
§ Vice-Admiral Hughes HallettI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
I gather that the Opposition do not think that this is a drafting Amendment. The object is, by omitting the word "constructing", to make the reference to
improving, maintaining and managing of a harbourin line 46, correspond with that in lines 38 and 39.
§ 6.45 p.m.
§ Mr. A. J. IrvineWe have a point in mind as being of some significance on this Amendment. I hope that the hon. and gallant Gentleman will be good enough to deal with it, and, if he thinks there is no substance in it, perhaps explain why.
101 We are dealing here, as I understand it, with the powers of the Minister's officers to inspect documents. As the Bill stands, there is power, as we read it—it is not a very felicitously worded provision—to inspect documents relative to the construction, improvement, maintenance and management of a harbour. We cannot understand why it should be proposed to diminish the Minister's power in this respect and deprive him of the right to inspect documents relative to construction.
It would not quite meet our doubts if it were said that this made the category conform with a category appearing elsewhere in the Clause, because the matter of inspection and the right to inspect is a separate matter and a separate right from those dealt with elsewhere. I trust that we have our made our difficulty plain. We certainly do not regard this as a drafting Amendment, and we should be grateful for some explanation of, and, if possible, justification for, it.
§ Vice-Admiral Hughes HallettIf I may speak again by leave of the House, I am not sure that I will be able to satisfy the hon. and learned Gentleman at this moment. We were certainly under the impression that this was purely a drafting Amendment to bring two provisions within some five lines or so into conformity. I am not clear why the hon. and learned Gentleman thinks that the word "constructing" should be allowed to creep in here.
§ Mr. HoyIt has not crept in. It was printed into the Bill by the Minister. The hon. and gallant Gentleman is now proposing to "creep" it out. That is the object of the Lords Amendment now before the House. If the hon. and gallant Gentleman is trying to argue that "constructing" did not appear five lines earlier in the subsection, ought not his Amendment to have been to insert "constructing" in line 38 rather than delete it here?
§ Vice-Admiral Hughes HallettIf I may speak again by leave of the House, the expression
improving, maintaining and managing a harbouroccurs over and over again throughout the Bill It is the legal method of 102 describing a harbour authority—persons engaged in doing that.As to my use of the words "creep in", although I do not wish to libel the Parliamentary draftsmen I think that "constructing" must have been inserted here originally by mistake, because throughout the rest of the Bill we define a harbour authority as engaged in "improving, maintaining and managing". I am not clear what purpose would be served by inserting "constructing" at this point in the Bill.
§ Mr. A. J. IrvineIf I may speak again by leave of the House, we are dealing here with control of harbour development. Clause 9(1,a) sets out a number of projects which come within the ambit of the Clause. The paragraph reads:
the execution of works for the construction, improvement or repair of a harbour".Therefore, it is not quite right to say that "construction" creeps in at the point that we are discussing when this juxtaposition of words occurs elsewhere. If "construction" is met alongside "improvement or repair" in Clause 9, and "constructing" alongside "improving" in Clause 10, those who are concerned with the operation of the Clause may reasonably think that there is some serious practical reason for the distinction.We think that there should be a power for the Minister's officers to make an inspection of documents relative to construction as well as the documents relative to improvement and maintenance when construction and improvement are dealt with side by side on a similar fooling in the rest of the Bill.
§ Vice-Admiral Hughes HallettI now see the point that the hon. and learned Gentleman is making. I can only say that our advice is that the omission of "constructing" here will not diminish the powers which my right hon. Friend will have in any material way in this case.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§
Lords Amendment: In page 11, line 16, leave out from "of" to "prohibition" in line 17 and insert:
a contravention, or an apprehended contravention, of, or a failure to comply with, any such".
§ Vice-Admiral Hughes HallettI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
This, too, in our submission, is a drafting Amendment.
§ Mr. MellishI understand that this Amendment and the following Amendments to No. 31 inclusive are regarded as drafting Amendments. If that is so, seeing that we have just got the Minister in some sort of trouble, it might help if they were all taken together.
§ Mr. SpeakerIf that is the accepted view of the House, perhaps we might.
§ Vice-Admiral Hughes HallettI do not think that Amendment No. 20 can be described entirely as a drafting Amendment. It certainly calls for explanation.
§ Mr. SpeakerThe suggestion was made with the best intentions.
§ Question put and agreed to.