LONDON ELECTRIC SUPPLY BILL [H.L.] (Hansard, 17 December 1908)

* THE EARL OF ONSLOW
said he ought to say a word or two about these Electric Supply Bills, because they were considered by a Committee of their Lordships' House for a very protracted period. One of those Bills had been rejected, and this one had been modified almost out of recognition. It was originally intended to be merely a Bill for linking up certain companies which might require assistance from one another, but it had now been made into a Bill by which they might all be linked up, and at a future period purchased by the London County Council. He was not going into the details, and he only wished to say that there were two provisions to which some exception might be taken. One provision was that the London County Council might lend to these companies sums of money shortly before the time 2050 arrived to purchase the companies upon such terms and conditions as they might arrange. The effect of that might be that the money advanced would take precedence of the present debentures. The other point was that a clause had been inserted by the Commons to the effect that the London County Council should have concurrent powers with the local authorities, and also with the Postmaster-General, to object to the erection of any plant or other buildings required by the companies in public roads or streets. It had been proved entirely to his satisfaction that this was not a new power, but that all the companies were now working under Provisional Orders granted by the Board of Trade which conferred on the London County Council the same powers as they were asking for under this Bill. If the noble Lord's reply was satisfactory he would move that the Commons' Amendment be agreed to.

* THE EARL OF CRAWFORD
said that a new principle had been introduced into this Bill because a single Department of the Government might now come forward and impose upon private companies a limitation of the powers granted to them by a special Act of Parliament under a provisional order. He wished to protest against this provision being taken as a precedent. It simply meant that although a company might have powers and room for the production of, say, 100,000 horse-power they were told that they should not exercise their rights and were limited to 60,000 horse-power; thus the company might be forced to buy land in another place and sacrifice their capital.

LORD HAMILTON OF DALZELL
said that the question of the security of the debenture holders being affected by this loan from the county council had been considered and the Board of Trade had taken counsel's opinion on the point. They had been advised that nothing in the sub-clause affected the rights of the debenture holders. The noble Lord was correct in assuming that the authorities consulted in regard to the laying of mains under various Provisional Orders were the Postmaster-General and the local authority, and in the case of London the 2051 borough council and the London County Council. Therefore the Bill did not make any serious change. The provision inserted by the Admiralty was for the protection of the Royal Observatory at Greenwich, and although it might be hard on the company, obviously it was necessary in the national interest.

* THE EARL OF CRAWFORD
said he was not complaining of the particular instance, but he did not think it ought to be used as a precedent.

LORD HAMILTON OF DALZELL
said he could not promise that under similar circumstances the same thing would not be done again. He thought that in future companies ought to avoid the selection of such sites.