§ Lords Amendment No. 192 agreed to: In page 90, line 22, after "Act" insert "this Act".
§
Lords Amendment No. 193: In page 91, line 31, leave out from beginning to "references" in line 33 and insert:
References in any Act to the acquisition of land under Part V of the principal Act or to land acquired thereunder (including references which, by Schedule 14 to that Act, are to be construed as such) shall be respectively construed as, or as including (according as the context requires)".
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
I emphasise again that it is necessary for the Bill to provide for the bringing forward of references to powers of acquisition under earlier enactments so that other provisions expressed in terms of these powers may be enabled to continue 1531 working as was intended. This is merely a list of such Statutes. There is no change in policy or any extension of policy.
§ Mr. Graham PageI want to query the drafting of the Amendment. Is it correct that it should be to leave out from the beginning to "reference"? I would have thought that that "reference" should also be left out. As it reads, the Amendment does not make sense. I think that the word "reference" should come out in order to put the Amendment in.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI should like to look at that in the next few moments.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Lords Amendment No. 194: In page 91, line 35, after first "and" insert "(a)".
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
§ Mr. SpeakerWith this we can also take Amendment No. 196.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonAmendment 194 is drafting. Amendment 195 is consequential upon the repeal by the Bill of Section 67 of the 1962 Act. It is necessary to make the Amendment in its place.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Subsequent Lords Amendment agreed to.
§ Lords Amendment No. 196: In page 92, line 2, at the end insert:
§ "The Highways Act 1959 (c. 25)
§ In section 38(2) (specification of highways which are to be maintainable at the public expense), in paragraph (e), after the words public path diversion order' there shall be inserted the words ' or in consequence of an order made by the Minister of Transport or the Minister of Housing and Local Government under section 153 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1962 or by a competent authority under section (Powers for local authorities analogous to section 153 of principal Act) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1968 '".
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
This amendment provides that any footpath or bridleway, created in consequence of a footpath or bridleway closure or diversion order whether made by the Minister of Transport or the 1532 Minister of Housing under Section 153 of the 1962 Act, or locally confirmed under new Clause "R" because unopposed, shall be among those highways which are maintainable at the public expense.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§
Lords Amendment No. 197: In page 92, line 12, leave out paragraph 10 and insert:
10. Any reference to section 68 of the Act shall be construed (according as the context may require) as including, or as being replaced by, a reference to section 26 of this Act.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
Part IV of the Bill includes provisions adapting the powers of compulsory acquisition contained in the Act of 1962 to the new development plan system. In order to do so it repeals Section 68 of that Act and introduces corresponding powers in Clause 26. The Sixth Schedule makes specific adaptations to the 1962 Act, so as to ensure consistency between that Act and the provisions of the Bill. One of the adaptations so made is included in Paragraph 10, which provides that for any reference to Section 68 of the Act there shall be substituted a reference to Clause 26 of the Bill.
§ Question put and agreed.
§ Subsequent Lords Amendments agreed to.
§
Lords Amendment No. 204: In page 95, line 14, after "78" insert:
(Conversion of highway into footpath or bridleway), (Powers for local authorities analogous to s. 153 of principal Act) or (Extinguishment of footpaths etc. over land held for planning purposes)".
§ Mr. GreenwoodI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
Paragraph 33 of Schedule 6 amends Section 176 of the 1962 Act, which provides for the manner in which the validity of development plans and of certain Orders and of actions by the Minister can be challenged in the courts. The Amendment adds orders under new Clauses "P". "R" and "S" to Paragraph 9(1)(b) of Section 176 and is necessary to make that Paragraph satisfactorily comprehensive.
§ Question put and agreed to.
1533
§
Lords Amendment No. 205: In page 95, line 27, at end insert
(h) any decision of the Minister on an application for an established use certificate referred to him under section (Grant of Certificate by Minister on referred application or appeal against refusal) (1) of the Act of 1968;
(i) any decision of the Minister on an appeal under section (Grant of certificate by Minister on referred application or appeal against refusal) (2) of the Act of 1968.
§ Mr. GreenwoodI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
This is consequential on new Clause "B", and adds decisions on called-in applications for established use certificates, and on appeals against refusal of such certificates, to the list of actions by the Minister for which Part XI of the 1962 Act lays down the manner of challenge in the courts.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§
Lords Amendment No. 206: In page 95, line 44, leave out from "section" to "above" in line 5 on page 96 and insert
(a) the validity of an enforcement notice shall not, except by way of an appeal under Part II of the Act of 1968 be questioned in any proceedings whatsoever on any of the grounds specified in paragraphs (b) to (e) of section 16(1) of that Act;
(b) the validity of a listed building enforcement notice under section 39 of the Act of 1968 shall not, except by way of an appeal under Part IV of Schedule 3 to that Act be questioned in any proceedings whatsoever on any of the grounds specified in sub-paragraphs (b) or (e) of paragraph 17(1) of that Schedule.
(2) Subsection (1)(a)".
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
§ Mr. SpeakerWe can take with this Lords Amendment No. 207.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonThese Amendments delete the first and third of the new subsections and substitute for them a revised subsection (1). The object of the revisions is to ensure that a technical defect in the service of an enforcement notice or listed building enforcement notice cannot be pleaded in the courts as a ground for upsetting the notice, but must be raised by way of appeal to the Minister, who has jurisdiction under Clause 16(b) and paragraph 17(4)(b) of Schedule 3, to dis- 1534 regard the failure of service where no one has been prejudiced.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Subsequent Lords Amendment agreed to.
§ Lords Amendment No. 208: In page 97, line 11, after "153" insert "or 155".
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
§ Mr. SpeakerWith this Amendment, we take Lords Amendment No. 210.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonThe interesting provision about these Amendments which should commend itself to the House is that they deal with challenge to the validity of footpath and bridleway orders by bringing them under Part XI of the Act of 1962. Part XI of that Act provides that the validity of development plans and certain decisions and orders under the Act may be challenged in the courts, within six weeks of the decision being announced, on the grounds that the decision was either ultra vires or in some other way in breach of the law.
At present, orders made by the Minister of Transport under Section 153 of the 1962 Act are subject to those provisions of Part XI and, therefore, challengeable in the courts. The Bill, in transferring jurisdiction relating to orders under Section 153 dealing with footpaths and bridleways to the Minister of Housing, leaves them subject to Part XI. This is for no very clear reason. The Amendment makes those orders subject to extinguishment rights, subject to challenge under Part XI.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Subsequent Lords Amendments agreed to.
§
Lords Amendment No. 213: In page 97, line 38, leave out paragraphs 38 and 39 and insert:
. In section 183 (orders subject to special parliamentary procedure), after the word 'Act', where first occurring, there shall be inserted the words 'or section 78 or (Conversion of highway into footpath or bridleway) of the Act of 1968'.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
1535 This Amendment does two things. It deletes paragraph 38 from Schedule 6 to the Bill as being unnecessary, and it substitutes a revised and clearer version of paragraph 39.
§ Mr. Graham PageI am sorry to spoil the hon. Gentleman's good run—he has been having it all his own way—but surely this must be wrong. The Amendment speaks of Section 183 as from the word "Act" which occurs in the second line of that Section. Therefore, it deals with Section 183(1) of the 1962 Act. In the Schedule of repeals, however, which we have not yet reached, I see that Section 183(1) of the 1962 Act is repealed.
It seems to me that in Lords Amendment No. 213 we are amending a Section which is later to be repealed. In the Schedule, we are not dealing with any transitional matter. We are dealing with permanent alterations in the law. There must be something wrong if we are amending a Section and later repealing it. Whether there is a printer's error in the numbers or it is a substantial error, I do not know, but we cannot have this Amendment to a Section of the 1962 Act and then, a few pages later, repeal it.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI would like to conside the point which the hon. Member has made. It may be that I have not understood it, but I think that the position is as follows. Paragraph 38, which extended the scope of Section 181 of the 1962 Act, was thought to be necessary to provide a right of appeal to the High Court on a point of law arising from a determination of the lawful use of land made by the Minister under Clause 16(5)(b) of the Bill in dealing with an enforcement appeal.
On further consideration, however, it seems clear that any such determination must count as part of the appeal decision, for which a right of appeal to the High Court on a point of law is already provided in Section 180 of the 1962 Act, as amended by paragraph 37 of Schedule 6. A separate right of appeal under Section 181 is, therefore, unnecessary, and it may also be undesirable in the sense that a similar right under two different Sections might cause confusion. I may, however, have misunderstood the 1536 point and I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for raising it.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§
Lords Amendment No. 214: In page 98, line 12, at end insert:
.In section 196 (expenses of county councils), after the word 'thereto', there shall be inserted the words 'or under the provisions of the Act of 1968'.
§ 2.30 a.m.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
Its effect is to extend the application of Section 196 of the 1962 Act to the provisions of the Bill.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§
Lords Amendment No. 215: In page 98, line 47, at end insert:
. In section 205 (ecclesiastical property)—
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
§ Mr. SpeakerWith this Lords Amendment we can also take Lords Amendments No. 219 and 220.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonThe Amendments are mainly to do what is necessary to apply to the provisions of the Bill those Sections of the Act of 1962 whose application under that Act is limited to the provisions of the Act listed is one or another of the paragraphs of Schedule 8 to that Act. If the Lords Amendments were not made the Sections referred to would not apply to the Bill.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Subsequent Lords Amendments agreed to.
§ Lords Amendment No. 224: In page 101, line 14, leave out "43, 45 to".
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
1537 As drafted, the Bill does not provide that the Greater London Council would have the functions referred to in Clause 44 of the Bill. The drafting is now put right.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§ Subsequent Lords Amendments agreed to.
§
Lords Amendment No. 229: In page 102, line 20, leave out from "the" to end of line and insert:
said Act of 1968; for the words 'paragraphs (a) to (c)' there shall be substituted the words 'paragraphs (a) and (b)'; and for the words 'section 77(1)' there shall be substituted the words 'section 177(1)(a)'".
§ Read a Second time.
§ Mr. SkeffingtonI beg to move, That this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
If the House will disagree with the Lords Amendment I will move an Amendment in lieu of it.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§
Amendment made to the Bill in lieu of Lords Amendment No. 229: In page 102, line 20, at end insert:
'for the words "paragraphs (a) to (c)" there shall be substituted the words "paragraphs (a) and (b)"; and for the words "section 177(1) of that Act" there shall be substituted the words "section 177(1)(a) of the Act of 1962"'.—[Mr. Skeffington.]
§ Subsequent Lords Amendments agreed to.