HC Deb 25 April 1967 vol 745 cc1389-91
Mr. MacArthur

I beg to move Amendment No. 11, in page 6, line 37, to leave out 'may be determined by the board' and insert: 'they and the board agree and failing agreement as the Secretary of State may determine,'. This is a small but important point which I did not raise in Committee. I apologise to the right hon. Gentleman for giving relatively short notice of it, but I am sure that he will by now have taken its point.

Clause 10 provides for the requisition arrangements by the regional water boards and water development boards. Under subsection (3), the boards have power to … cause a requisition in respect of the financial year … to be sent to their contributing authorities requiring each of them to pay such sum as may be apportioned to each … The subsection adds that these requisitions shall be paid at such intervals and by such instalments as may be determined by the board, … As it stands, that is not particularly unreasonable, but it raises one problem which many local authorities might well face. Under the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1947, local authorities are not allowed to demand payment of rates before 1st November in any year, and although it is possible to collect a proportion of rate revenue before 1st November by instalment schemes which they are allowed to introduce, I understand that very few local authorities succeed in doing that.

Therefore, if under Clause 10 the regional boards demanded payment of their requisition by, say, three instalments, payable in June, September and December for example, the local authorities would require to borrow in order to pay the requisition in advance of the receipt of rate moneys. The interest charges which would result would be a burden on the rating account rather than on the water account. It appears that there is no good reason why payment of requisitions to water boards should not be governed by the provisions of the 1947 Act, which apply to all other requisitions.

What I have done, therefore, is to "lift" the relevant part of Section 214(4) of the 1947 Act, and the Amendment simply proposes that it should be introduced into the Bill. The result would be that the intervals and instalments of the requisitions would be determined not by the board alone but by the board and the local authority. In the event of any dispute the Secretary of State would determine what the interval and instalments should be. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will agree that that is a reasonable proposition.

Mr. Manuel

Many local authorities—indeed, almost all—receive rate payments from local authority houses by collections on a weekly or fortnightly basis with the rent. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will bear that in mind.

Mr. MacArthur

I agree, but while local authorities generally have power to collect rates by instalment, they are not always able to introduce such schemes. I understand that if they were required to pay moneys over to the regional boards before 1st November they might have to borrow money, and that would be an added burden to the ratepayers.

Mr. Ross

As the hon. Gentleman says, the effect of the Amendment would be that the arrangement for paying over the sums requisitioned would be on a basis agreed by each authority and the board, and, failing agreement, on a basis determined by the Secretary of State. If for some reason or other there were disagreement the Secretary of State would accept the responsibility of making a determination.

I agree that the basis provided for in the Amendment is the normal arrangement applying to requisitions by joint committees and joint boards under the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1947. But there are other Acts and other Orders, such as the West Lothian Water Board Order, 1958, which have incorporated a provision that the intervals and instalments for payment of requisitions will be determined by the board.

However, on reflection, I think that that is probably a bit too rigid. It may well be that a disagreement will arise—not terribly important, but one which the bodies concerned think the Secretary of State should determine—and I am prepared to accept that there should be scope for settling the arrangements by such a decision and reference, and on that basis I think that we should accept the Amendment.

Mr. MacArthur

I am astonished and very grateful to the right hon. Gentleman. When he started referring to other Acts and Measures I thought that he was about to explain why, because of all sorts of precedents, it should not be accepted. I am most grateful, and I am sure that the Amendment will be an easement for many local authorities in Scotland.

Amendment agreed to.