PORT OF LONDON BILL. (Hansard, 17 December 1908)

§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND
said he understood it would not be convenient to raise his first Amendment because it would exclude any possibility of subsequent Amendments. Therefore, with their Lordships' permission, he would move his second Amendment, the effect of which would be so to alter Clause 1 (Establishment of Port of London Authority) as to increase the number of appointed Members from twelve to fourteen, in order to give one representative each to the Middlesex and Surrey county councils. Only yesterday a strong plea was made for the county councils who had authority on the banks of the River Thames. He pointed out that by an Amendment in Committee the House had granted one representative each to the Kent and Essex County Councils, and emphasised the desirability of making a similar concession to the councils of the two other counties affected by the establishment of the new Port Authority. The county councils of Middlesex and Surrey had quite as good a claim to representation on the Board as the county councils of Kent and Essex. Something happened last night which convinced him that Middlesex had a very strong claim for representation upon this Board. His noble friend 2001 Lord Jersey moved an Amendment to exempt the river between Brentford and Teddington from the operation of the Bill because that part of the river had no mercantile interest at all and was principally used for purposes of recreation. An attempt had been made at Richmond at great expense to secure the amenities of that part of the river for the purposes of recreation, but those amenities had nothing whatever to do with the object of the Port of London Bill. When his noble friend moved that Amendment the noble Lord in charge of the Bill pointed out that this question had never been raised before, that it had been sprung upon the Government, that it would upset the financial arrangements of the measure, and that it was impossible under those circumstances to exempt that part of the river. If it was impossible to exempt a part of the river which had no mercantile interest and had a totally different interest from the rest of the river, surely that was a very strong argument for giving to the councils of the counties adjoining that part of the river some voice in the deliberations of the Board. It was said that the composition of the Port Authority was purely of a commercial character, although he confessed he could not follow the argument that the Admiralty was a mercantile body. The argument was that the new board was not a body such as that which was qualified to alter the upper reaches of the river, which were devoted to the purposed of recreation. It would be a very serious thing if the mercantile proclivities of the Port of London were allowed to affect that part of the river which was now outside, not only their jurisdiction, but also their interests. He ventured to think that it was not a very great demand which these county councils made that they also should be represented on the Board. A great deal was made yesterday of the argument that it was not advisable' to make the Board too large. Of course, that was very true, because they all knew that as a rule the larger a body was the less good work it did. But surely it was also true that they should not cut down the size of any body so as to omit altogether the representation of interests which might be keenly affected, and he could not believe that the 2002 efficiency of this Board would be seriously affected by having three or four more members upon it. He was justified in saying that the Comity Council of Middlesex felt very strongly on this point. The Joint Committee refused to hear one single word that council had to say in support of its desire to be represented, and that in itself he thought was a very strong argument for adding their representative to the Board. Those facts justified him in pressing very strongly upon the House the claims of the counties of Surrey and Middlesex for representation.

§ LORD DESBOROUGH
proposed, as a consequential Amendment, the addition of a member to represent the Corporation of West Ham.

§ THE DUKE OF NORTHUMBERLAND
I am sorry to interrupt the noble Lord, but had we not better settle my question first?

THE LORD CHANCELLOR
The Standing Order of the House requires the question to be put from the Chair as soon as it is moved. I think that rather implies that each Amendment should be treated by itself, and I would suggest that that is the best course to adopt.

LORD HAMILTON OF DALZELL
said that 'his prophecy of the preceding day that a certain cause would have a certain result had been rapidly fulfilled. There was a certain amount of satisfaction in being able to say "I told you so," and he said it now. What the Government and the Joint Committee had feared had happened. The door had been opened to further municipal representation on this body, and the rush for representation had already commenced, headed by the noble Duke and by the noble Lord who had been momentarily staved off. He did not know where that rush was going to cease. Yesterday he opposed the 2003 inclusion of Kent and Essex, and to-day he must as strongly oppose the inclusion of these further municipal bodies. If this Amendment, and the further Amendment of which they had had an indication, passed, the number of appointed representatives on the authority would be fifteen, while the number of elected representatives remained at eighteen. The whole character of the body would be altered, and altered for the worse. If this undertaking were to be carried on, as was contemplated in the former Bill, by municipal capital, such representation would be right, but that was not the case. The capital embarked in the docks was private capital, and even under this Bill the shareholders would hold Port stock instead of shares of the dock company. It would be private capital, and if this Amendment were passed a great deal of the security given to the shareholders on which the bargain had been concluded would be taken away. The idea of the Board of Trade and the Joint Committee was that the Port should be managed by business men in a business-like way, and by business men carrying on their business in the Port. If their Lordships chose to alter the constitution of the body and if it did not prove successful in its management of the Port the fault would not lie with the Board of Trade or the Joint Committee.

THE EARL OF JERSEY
said that the prophecy of the noble Lord had come true simply because of the desire of the local authorities to have some control over the stretch of river that ran through their respective counties. That was the reason why Middlesex desired to be represented upon the authority which would govern a large portion of the river which ran through the county of Middlesex. Middlesex had a stretch of seven miles from Brentford downwards which was full of wharves and docks of various kinds, end for all that they had not a single representative upon the Port Authority. Therefore, it was not unnatural that the county council should desire to be represented, having such large interests at stake. He hoped the noble Duke would press this question. The Middlesex County Council were very strong upon this point, and he did 2004 not think the security of these who invested their money in the Port of London would be in the least invalidated by the fact that all the authorities who had an interest in the success of the Port were represented.

§ * VISCOUNT ST. ALDWYN
I think there is a difference between this Amendment and that which was carried by your Lordships yesterday. If Essex and Kent are not directly represented from their county councils on the board they will have no representation at all, although their interests on both banks of the Thames below London are very considerable. On the other hand, Middlesex and Surrey will be represented through the London County Council which comprises a very considerable part of their areas. I feel that this Amendment cannot be supported on the same grounds as that of yesterday. There is some force in what the noble Lord says, that it will be very difficult to know where to stop. If this is carried there will be an application from the borough of West Ham, and it is possible that the borough of Richmond may require representation. The whole balance of interests will be upset, and instead of the authority being a commercial body, its majority will be merely the representation of local authorities. I hope that the noble Duke will not press the Amendment.

§ LORD DESBOROUGH
said that after that result he would not press his Amendment, but would impress on the House that if any more representatives were added to the Port Authority West Ham had a very strong chum. West Ham was a most populous district containing 300,000 inhabitants, and it contained two of the most important docks on the river. A large proportion of the population was engaged in working at the docks and wharves, and those facts entitled West Ham to some consideration.

LORD HAMILTON OF DALZELL
said the next Amendment he had to move carried out an undertaking which he gave to the noble Lord opposite having regard to the preservation of commons and open spaces. The words he row moved had been accepted by the noble Lord.