POWER TO EXCEPT BUSINESSES BY AGREEMENT

HC Deb 28 April 1970 vol 800 cc1070-3

(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, the National Ports Authority may enter into an agreement under this section with—

1. (a) any person carrying on a port business at a harbour of theirs; or
2. (b) any person proposing to carry on at such a harbour a business which, if carried on there, would be a port business,

that, subject to such conditions, if any, as may be specified in the agreement, no application for a vesting order shall be made in respect of that business during such period as may be so specified; and so long as the Authority are precluded by such an agreement from applying for a vesting order in respect of a port business, the power to make vesting orders shall not extend to making an order in respect of that business.

(2) The National Ports Authority shall not enter into an agreement under this section with respect to a port business or proposed port business unless they are of the opinion that to do so will further the efficient and economical maintenance or development of the harbour at which the business is or is proposed to be carried on or will in some other way be of advantage to the Authority as regards that harbour in connection with their duty under section 6(1) of this Act.

(3) In the case of a port business which is being carried on at a harbour at the date when the harbour is placed under the charge of the National Ports Authority as mentioned in subsection (2) of section 33 of this Act, the Authority shall not enter into an agreement under this section with respect to that business if and so long as their duty under that subsection extends to it; and where in pursuance of that subsection the Authority have applied for a vesting order in respect of such a port business, they shall not enter into an agreement under this section with respect to that business unless the Minister has (whether or not after the holding of a public local inquiry or the affording to an objector of an opportunity to be heard) decided not to make the order on the ground that the business is one which may be, and should be, excepted as provided by section 35(3) of this Act.

(4) The benefit of an agreement under this section may be assigned with the written consent of the National Ports Authority, but not otherwise.

(5) Where an agreement under this section has been entered into with respect to a port business, then, so long as the National Ports Authority are thereby precluded from applying for a vesting order in respect of that business, this Part of this Act shall continue to apply as if the activities comprised in that business constituted a separate port business, notwithstanding that, in consequence of the placing of a further harbour under the charge of the Authority or of the coming into force of any provision of a devolution scheme, those activities would otherwise by virtue of section 34(2), (3) or (4) of this Act fall to be treated for the purposes of this Part of this Act as included with other activities in a more extensive port business.—[Mr. Mulley.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr. Speaker

I think that it would be convenient to discuss, at the same time, Amendment (a) to the new Clause, in line 14, leave out from " will " to the end of line 16 and insert— improve the service offered to users of the harbour ". and Government Amendment No. 64.

The Minister of Transport (Mr. Frederick Motley)

I beg to move, That the Clause be read a Second time.

This new Clause and most of the Amendments on the Notice Paper in my name arise from requests in Committee. Some of the particular points of the Amendments are due to my honouring the undertakings which I gave then. The subject of security of tenure engaged the attention of both sides of the Committee and the Clause, which I would suggest should follow Clause 35, would provide that the N.P.A. may enter into agreement with a person carrying on a port business and that, subject to any conditions specified in the agreement, no application for a vesting order shall be made for that business during whatever period is specified in the agreement.

The National Ports Authority is not to enter into this kind of agreement unless it thinks that to do so would further the efficient and economical maintenance or development of the harbour or be of some other advantage to the authority. It is not, of course, to enter into such an agreement as long as it has a duty to apply for a vesting order, but what we have particularly in mind are situations in which an objection has been sustained to take over by the N.P.A.

We feel it only right that the business concerned, having had its objection sustained, should have the certainty that there would not be again in the near future a similar situation, and that it will have reasonably clear commercial environment in which to conduct its business. This meets my undertaking in Committee, I think.

Mr. Edward M. Taylor

On the principle that we should be grateful for small mercies, we would certainly welcome the Clause, which deals with some of the points advocated so splendidly by my hon. Friend the Member for Southgate (Mr. Berry) in Committee. I am glad that the Minister has made a real concession on this point, because some security of tenure is given to those who will now be cleared after an objection procedure.

Would he be prepared, however, to consider our small Amendment (a) as a basis for improving the wording of the Clause? Two questions arise. What particular period has the Minister in mind in the phrase in lines 7 and 8 of the new Clause: …during such period as may be so specified…"? Second, would it not be prudent and appropriate to include the words of Amendment (a) instead of the words of the Clause: …in some other way be of advantage to the Authority as regards that harbour in connection with their duties under Section 6…"? In deciding whether such an undertaking should be given to a port business, the N.P.A. should have regard not just to the commercial or other advantage of the N.P.A. but also to whether such a procedure would be generally advantageous to the users of the port. This is a small Amendment to the Clause which I hope the Minister will be able to accept.

Mr. Mulley

It is not for me to say what period would be involved. This is clearly a matter for agreement between the business concerned and the National Ports Authority. In some circumstances, the business may want a short agreement and in others it may want a long one, so I could not say what would be reasonable. Having given the parties the rights to make such agreement, we must also allow them to determine its length.

The other point is that the hon. Gentleman only read out the words: …will in some other way be of advantage to the Authority as regards that harbour in connection with their duty…". The important thing is their duty under Clause 6(1) of the Bill and this restricts the words that precede it. What I have in mind is to give them the maximum flexibility in seeking these arrangements. I feel that if there is to be a change and it is desired that the question of improving services to users of the harbour—and I agree this is an important matter; I have the same desire as the Opposition, because the ports are a service industry and their success will depend on the quality of service they provide—I should have thought that maybe the best place to put this would be in Clause 6(1).

If this would meet the Opposition's wish I should consider whether I could find a form of words without commitment at a later stage to put in Clause 6(1). I think that this would be a better way of doing things. This is only in a narrow set of circumstances. This requirement would be of a general part of their duty and not strictly in the same narrow circumstances of the Amendment.

Mr. Anthony Berry (Southgate)

I am sure that my hon. Friend would thank the Minister and accept his suggestion that the Amendment be incorporated in Clause 6(1). The important thing is to have it in the Bill and I am happy to have it in Clause (6). I thank the Minister for the new Clause, which arises out of Amendments which I moved in Committee when I described this part of the Bill as being a supreme example of uncertainty which I know the Minister does not want to happen. I am grateful to him for meeting our point and incorporating this Clause into the Bill, and I advise my hon. Friends to accept the Clause.

Mr. Mulley

I should have pointed out that with this new Clause, Mr. Speaker, goes Government Amendment No. 64, which is consequential, in page 48, line 19, after ' power ', insert: ' (subject to any agreement under section (Power to except businesses by agreement) below) '.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause read a Second time and added to the Bill.