§ Amendments reported (according to Order).
§ THE EARL OF CRAVENI beg to move the Amendment standing in my name.
§ Amendment moved—
§
Clause 6, at end insert the following new subsections:
(6) For the purpose of working and lighting the railway and for use in any part of any post office building in communication with the railway by means of a shaft or in the buildings of the Post Office in or near St. Martin's-le-Grand and Queen Victoria Street in the city of London and Mount Pleasant Clerkenwell or in any extension
1840
of any such building within a distance of fifty yards and for the purpose of general telegraphic (including telephonic) communication the Postmaster-General may lay down along the railway, and maintain and use cables, mains, lines, and apparatus for transmitting electrical energy.
(7) The Postmaster-General may transmit transform, and use for the purposes of this Act electrical energy generated or transformed at any Post Office generating station or sub-station and for the transmission of such electrical energy may lay down and maintain all necessary and convenient cables, mains, lines, and apparatus, but nothing in this Act shall authorise the Postmaster-General to use such electrical energy for lighting or heating any part of any post office building other than the buildings and extensions of buildings mentioned in the preceding subsection.
(8) The Postmaster-General may enter upon and open and break up streets and other public places for the purpose of laying down and maintaining cables mains lines and apparatus—
subject however to the following provisions and restrictions, that is to say:—
(9) The Postmaster-General and any company, authority, or person having power under any Act of Parliament or order confirmed by Parliament to supply electrical energy may make and carry into effect agreements and arrangements for the supply of electrical energy to the Postmaster-General for the purposes of this Act, and for executing any works or providing any apparatus necessary for the purposes of such supply, but nothing in this subsection shall authorise any such company, authority, or person to break up the surface of any public street or place."—(The Earl of Craven.)
§ LORD NEWTONI do not know whether it is the usual practice to move an Amendment of this kind without giving any reasons for it. I can only assume that the reasons were given yesterday when I was not present. This is a Bill to the principle of which no objection has been raised. It is practically a Govern- 1841 ment Bill, but it came before a Private Bill Committee in the House of Commons. That Committee gave a somewhat grudging assent to it, and expressed the hope that the matters would have the careful consideration of the Department before the engineering details of the scheme were finally settled. When this Bill came before a Private Bill Committee of your Lordships' House, of which I was chairman, there was no Preamble opposition at all, and such opposition as there was was confined to the case of landowners and the case of the electric supply companies.
But in the course of the proceedings the Post Office put forward their case for the supply of electrical energy for the purpose of working this tube railway. It was perfectly evident that their case was an extremely weak one, and I do not think I am doing the engineers who represent the Post Office any injustice in saving that they were quite unable to answer many of the questions which were put to them by the opponents. What was more important still, it became perfectly obvious that practically no steps whatever had been taken by the Post Office to ascertain whether electricity could be supplied more economically and more effectively by outside bodies. The one thing that was quite plain was that a very large sum of money was intended to be spent, and the results were of such an extremely doubtful nature that the Committee could not bring themselves to sanction it. So convinced were they of the somewhat hazardous nature of this enterprise that at one time we contemplated inserting a proviso that before the Post Office incurred this enormous expenditure the consent of the Treasury should be obtained. We abandoned that proposal because it was obvious that that was transferring the decision of the matter to the Treasury whereas the Committee was obviously the proper body to decide. We therefore felt it incumbent upon us to reject that portion of the Bill which dealt with the supply of electricity.
The attitude of the Post Office was briefly this. They said "We wish to supply this electrical energy ourselves; we consider that we are entitled to do it; we hold that we are able to do it, and we do not see why there should be any opposition to it "; and although they 1842 produced two engineers of their own who had been their advisers on the subject they took no steps to produce any other witnesses in favour of the scheme. To put it quite shortly, I presume that everybody will agree that when a Private Bill Committee are appointed to consider a question of this kind they ought to look at the matter from the point of view of the interests of the public. We, as I say, were so impressed with the somewhat nebulous nature of this scheme that we decided very reluctantly to cut out the clause dealing with this particular point. And let me point out, that, although I see that a good deal of indignation has been expressed, for my part I am quite unable to see that any particular hardship ensues. There is nothing whatever to prevent; the Post Office making their tube. That is a considerable undertaking which will take a long time. It would be easy for them to commence work upon the tube and to come to Parliament again with a small Bill relating to the supply of electrical energy next session, and no time, as far as I can see, would be lost. I need hardly assure the House, as far as this particular Committee was concerned, that it was entirely unprejudiced and unhampered in its views, and I am not aware that there was anyone on it who had any particular objection to or predilection for State or municipal enterprise or things of that description.
I had the advantage on this Committee of the assistance of Lord Sydenham, who is, I am glad to see, in his place, and of Lord Welby, both of whom have had great experience of the work of Public Departments, and I hope we shall hear the opinion of Lord Sydenham in the course of this discussion. I submit that if Public Departments appear before. Private Bill Committees they are hardly entitled to assume a right to be treated differently from any other promoters. A Public Department must take its chance in the same way as any other promoters, and is just as likely to obtain fair treatment. I have no doubt that mistakes are occasionally made in the course of Private Bill procedure. Probably I have frequently made them myself, but I confess that, although I have many times had doubts as to decisions which I have given, I felt very little doubt as to our being right in this particular instance. If, whenever a Public Department promotes a Bill and finds that that Bill is not accepted in its entirety by a 1843 Private Bill Committee it is to come here or to the other House and ask that the decision of the Committee should be entirely revoked, then I submit you are reducing Private Bill legislation to little less than a farce. At the very last moment a proposal has been put into my hand which, had it been made earlier in the proceedings, might conceivably have saved a great deal of trouble.
The gist of the proposal is this. I understand that an undertaking will be given by some responsible member of the Government that if the Post Office find that electrical energy can be supplied cheaper by any private company, they will abandon their own right and make use of the company's supply. I do not feel confident to express an opinion myself upon a proposal of this kind, put into my hands literally at the eleventh hour; but so far as I am able to judge it seems to me to be a fair and reasonable proposal, and if something of the sort had been suggested during the course of our deliberations, none of this trouble would have arisen. As it is, I do not feel confident to express a definite opinion whether or not this is satisfactory, but I hope that in the course of the discussion it will become apparent what the opinion of the House is on the subject; and if the opinion of the House is that this proposal ought to be accepted, and if it is also understood that it shall be rigidly adhered to in the spirit, then for my part I shall not offer any opposition.
§ LORD SYDENHAMMy Lords, I can add little to the lucid explanation of the noble Lord who presided over the Committee. Our general experience is that when Government Departments undertake work of this kind they do not do it quite so cheaply as private agencies. I do not know whether the Post Office is a shining exception to this general rule, but if so, surely the onus probandi rests with the Post Office to show that it can work more economically than a company. No evidence before the Committee in that sense was forthcoming. If such evidence had been brought forward showing that the Post Office authorities had thoroughly considered the question from that point of view, the Committee would have had no difficulty in coming to a conclusion. But, on the other hand, the evidence clearly showed that the comparative advantages 1844 of a Government supply and of a supply by private companies had never been thought out at all. No comparative estimates had been made. In those circumstances I think there was no course before the Committee except the one which we felt bound to take.
It is not a question only, as seems to have been thought in some quarters, of the utilisation of the existing plant. The proposal would necessitate the installation of a new, large, and very expensive plant, considerably increasing, therefore, responsibilities of the nature which, as I have said, Government Departments are not always best calculated to bear. The amended Bill gives full power to construct all the tubes. The Post Office will need plenty of time in which to carry out that work, and if a Bill were brought forward next session dealing with the electrical supply the Post Office would have ample time to make this comparative calculation, and to show, if they could, to the satisfaction of a Select Committee that their method was much cheaper. At all events that would leave the decision as to which was the cheaper to an unbiased body, which might be regarded as a judicial one. This excellent project, as it seemed to the Committee to be, could thus go through quite unchecked, and the only necessity would be to bring in a Bill next session dealing with the electrical portion of it. From my point of view that would be a satisfactory way of dealing with the matter.
LORD GORELLMy Lords, as a member of the Select Committee to which this Bill was referred, I should like to say that I entirely concur with what has fallen from Lord Newton as to our duties as a Private Bill Committee. It was because of that that I attached great importance to the question whether the respective merits of a supply by the Post Office or by private companies had been considered. To show that this matter really did receive careful consideration from the members of the Committee, I may mention that I specifically asked the question [Question No. 422], "Had you any outside advice on this question we are discussing now of the relative cost?" and the witness replied "Yes, and he confirms our figures." The answer was apparently satisfactory. But that was followed by other questions, from the answers to which it became absolutely 1845 clear that this question had received no consideration at all. If the question had been considered and the companies had quoted a high price, or a price higher than a careful estimate of what the Post Office thought they could supply for, I for one would not have adopted the course which I and the other members of the Committee thought right to adopt. But in view of the fact that there had been no consideration whatever on those lines, I venture to think that the only course open to us was that which, in the public interest, we took.
THE LORD PRIVY SEAL AND SECRETARY OF STATE FOR INDIA (THE MARQUESS OF CREWE)My Lords. I am glad that we have had the advantage of hearing the opinions of three members of the strong Committee who considered this question. It evidently was a Committee of unusual experience and power, and it is quite evident, therefore, that the conclusions which it reached must demand the most serious consideration from the full House. The difficulty which faces us at the commencement of considering any question of this kind is one which is very well known to your Lordships. There are two extreme parties in questions of this kind. There is one party which desires to make every municipal enterprise the subject of public supply. There is another party which desires to see all the public services in the hands of private adventure. I am quite sure that the Committee represented neither of those extreme schools, but desired to consider the case on its merits and to hold an accurate balance between those two extremes. I was chairman for two years of the Joint Committee on Municipal Trading. Consequently I have been profoundly immersed in this subject, as well as from having had a rather unusually long experience in the Committee rooms upstairs, and I ant well aware that in matters of this kind there are always representatives of the two extreme parties who desire to impress their views on Parliament.
But, my Lords, we have really only to think of how this particular service can be best performed in the interests of the public. That is to say, if the Postmaster-General can supply the electricity for the working of this railway at a cheaper rate than it can be supplied elsewhere, he 1846 should not be debarred from having the opportunity of doing so. If, on the other hand, there is a definite gain in his obtaining the electricity for this public service from outside, we should all agree that in the interests of the public it ought to be so obtained. The objection and difficulty that seem to me to attach to the action which the Committee took in striking out the whole of Clause 6 except the first paragraph consist in this, that you do not arrive at that at which you wish to arrive—an equal and free chance for everybody. You debar the Postmaster-General in any circumstance from supplying electricity from either of the two great generating stations which he already possesses, and that being so you weigh the balance, as it seems to me, in the direction of favouring the outside suppliers, the public companies. As the Bill stands, the Postmaster-General is invited to make his railway and then to remain at the absolute mercy of the electric supply companies of London, who are probably quite capable of acting in combination and of making such a charge as they think fit for the electricity supply. The actual amount is not much; it is under 500,000 units a year for the entire conduct of this railway. Therefore as far as the source of supply is concerned I cannot make out that any excessive demand would be made upon the existing generating stations belonging to the Postmaster-General. That is why I say that the precise action of the Committee does not seem to me to hold a fair balance as between the two parties. It is quite true, as noble Lords have said, that the Postmaster-General can come to Parliament again, but I do not feel at all certain that he would care to take that course. It is possible that he might prefer to drop his Bill and suspend the making of this railway until such a time as he is placed by Parliament in an equal position with the other competing suppliers.
I now come to the proposition which my noble friend opposite mentioned. The Postmaster-General is fully prepared and definitely proposes, in view of the conclusion which the Committee of this House reached—that it was not proved, as the Committee understood, that the Postmaster-General could supply on better terms than other people and therefore ought to supply—to invite tenders from the public companies and also from the local authorities empowered to supply 1847 electricity, and if it then appears that, taking all the circumstances into consideration, a real and appreciable saving would result by taking a supply of that kind instead of instituting a Post Office supply, the Postmaster-General is prepared to take that course. Noble Lords can take it from me that this will be done assuming that there is an appreciable balance of advantage in taking the outside supply. In these circumstances I hope that your Lordships will agree to the reinsertion of the clause. I have endeavoured to explain why it is that it could hardly be expected that the Postmaster-General would take powers for his railway which would leave him for the time being at the mercy of other people on a quite vague expectation that sooner or later Parliament would come to his rescue.
LORD MONK BRETTONMy Lords, there is one point which I do not think was before the Committee, and which I think has escaped the noble Marquess, and I should like to call the attention of the House to it. It is not a question of two schools of thought nowadays. It is not a question between municipal enterprise and company enterprise. That question has been settled in favour of municipal enterprise. But inasmuch as all the companies and the borough authorities possessing these powers know that the powers cease in 1931, they will be desirous of coming to terms with the authority which has the option of purchase—namely, the London County Council—very much sooner than that; and I have reason to believe that they will be at close grips with this question probably in the next two or three years. It is pretty certain that the electric lighting authority for London in the future will be one great authority. One authority can produce electricity very much cheaper than a number of competing authorities such as there are at the present time. That being so, those most acquainted with this matter on the London County Council are extremely anxious that no new authority should conic in as an electrical authority for London. I do not think that was brought to the knowledge of the Committee. It was not brought to their knowledge for this reason, that if the London County Council had gone before the Committee they would have had to produce a great deal of expert evidence and incur an expense which was quite unnecessary in view of the dimensions of this Bill. They therefore contented them- 1848 selves with an objection to the breaking up-of the streets. But I do say that in the light of the circumstances at the present time it is undesirable that any new development should take place in the way of laying down electricity mains. Such development is not likely to come from the companies, because they cannot raise capital having regard to what is to happen in 1931; and for the same reason it is not likely to come to any great extent from the borough councils. I hope Lord Newton will insist on the recommendation which his Committee made.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWEI confess I do not quite understand the bearing of the observations of the noble Lord who has just sat down. Does he mean that the Post Office ought not to be encouraged to increase its present electrical power and light operations by the Bill as proposed, or is it that he objects to the possibility of some other authority, either a local authority, perhaps one of the minor local authorities, or a public company stepping in and taking over this particular work? In the first place, I must remind him that so far as the Post Office are concerned they have two very large and powerful electrical power producing stations already. Speaking from memory I think they have one which produces 4,250,000 units a year and another which produces over 2,000,000 units. That being so, the comparatively small addition which would be caused to these operations by undertaking the working of this underground electric tramway is not very formidable. If, on the other hand, I am able to claim the noble Lord as an ally and he objects to the idea that one of the smaller local authorities or sonic company may step in and undertake the duty of supplying this electricity, then I am very much obliged to the noble Lord. But I confess that I was not entirely clear from what point of view he made his observations.
LORD MONK BRETTONThe object of my remarks was this. We do not know exactly where we are going—I am speaking for the public—in the matter of electricity for London. We shall know in another two years. That being so, the London County Council are inclined to think that it is a waste of public money to branch out in new directions which may prove to be false ones.
THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEESMy Lords, purely from the point of view of the Private Bill procedure of your Lordships' House, I confess that I view with considerable regret the course which the Government; have thought it wise to take in dealing with this Bill. The Bill, I think I may say, has been specially privileged in its progress through your Lordships' House. It reached this House on July 24, which gave little enough time to enable it to be referred to an opposed Committee. I think I am right in saying that it is the last Bill that reached your Lordships' House which was referred to sin opposed Committee upstairs. Certainly a Bill which reached your Lordships' House afterwards, the East Ha in Corporation Bill, you have been good enough to suspend; and there have been other Bills in the course of this session which have followed the usual course, and which, not being able to be got through in normal time, have had to be dropped by the promoters. This Bill reached this House, as I say, very late. Subject to your Lordships' Standing Orders, the Committee could not sit before August, and I am very glad that the Leader of the House sees that I was fortunate in getting a strong Committee to consider this Bill. The Committee contained two members of the Opposition side, two noble Lords from the Cross Benches, and the noble Lord, Lord Welby, from the Government side, so that, apart altogether from its experience, which was, of course, very great, it was a very powerful and impartial Committee.
The usual position in which promoters find themselves when they go before an opposed Committee of your Lordships' House is that their case is heard, the decision is given, and if they do not like the decision they either accept it or drop their Bill. The Government, however, are taking another course. They say, "We do not like the decision, and therefore we ask the House to reverse it." It would be a very unfortunate thing if it were to be generally understood, when impartial Committees upstairs have inquired into a case, that the Government would assume a privileged position and claim a right to review the decision in your Lordships' House whenever the decision was against them. That being so, I agree with the noble Lord opposite; and, as I said yesterday, after the fullest inquiry I do not see how the Committee 1850 on merits could possibly have decided otherwise than they did decide in throwing out this clause. The whole Bill was described by the chief engineer for the Post Office as a "plunge." He spoke about taking the plunge, and therefore I think anybody would have agreed that it was incumbent upon the Public Department, before taking the plunge, to show that they had carefully considered the direction in which the plunge was going. No evidence justifying any such claim was offered to the Committee.
I do not think that the noble Marquess behind me has given fair weight to the argument of my noble friend opposite that the position of the Post Office is really very little harmed as regards delay. All that has happened is that the Post Office have been told to take further time and to give further consideration to their methods of supplying electricity to this line when it is constructed. It is all very well to say that there might be difficulties in getting a Bill through the House of Commons in a future session, but, after all, the Government are masters of the situation. I felt very strongly before the debate began this evening that it was a wise decision of my noble friend to advise the Post Office to take further time to consider the enormous discrepancy there is between their figures and the figures put by the opposition. It practically amounts to this, that the companies say, in evidence, that they could provide power at half the price at which the Post Office say they will he able to provide it under this Bill—a very serious situation from the public point of view, and a situation which, in view of possible developments which the Post Office spoke of, the noble Lord opposite and his colleagues could not possibly have neglected.
The situation has been considerably altered by the declaration which the Leader of the House has just made as to the intentions of the Department. I agree with Lord Newton that it was a great pity that that declaration could not have been made before the Committee upstairs. It would have been much more carefully weighed and gone into by the Committee upstairs than it can possibly be by your Lordships this afternoon at the tail end of the session, and without, of course, the facilities for going into details that the Committee had. I understand that the 1851 declaration amounts to this, that the Department intend to invite tenders, in view of the history of this Bill, for the supply of energy from the companies and from the local authorities. It may be that there will be a "ring" of the companies. I understand that there are at this moment fourteen generating stations in London belonging to companies, and it seems very difficult to imagine that for this amount of electrical energy a ring such as seems to be feared could really be set up against a Government Department. But it is distinctly understood that these tenders will be called for, and that if in their wisdom the Government Department are satisfied that it will be to the public economy that they should get their electricity from elsewhere instead of themselves generating it, they will definitely do so. If the noble Lord opposite is satisfied with that declaration, which, of course, I know is intended to be properly carried out, I should not advise your Lordships not to accept it. Should your Lordships agree to the Amendment it will be proposed in a slightly different form from that in which it is on the Paper, but doubtless that is a point which can be discussed at the conclusion of this debate.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNEYour Lordships are asked to put back into this Bill a clause which was struck out of it by an exceptionally strong Committee of your Lordships' House after a full examination of the evidence. The course thus suggested is obviously a very unusual one, and one which, if adopted, would constitute a not very convenient precedent. It would mean that we should admit the right of the Government of the day to set itself up upon all these occasions as a kind of court of review of decisions resulting from the inquiries of Select Committees of your Lordships' House.
It is clear from what has been said this evening that the Select Committee considered this proposal with a sole eye to the interests of the public. I need not say in a case of this kind that no Party considerations could come into play, nor even those other considerations which the noble Marquess who leads the House had in his mind when he said that opinion was divided into two schools, the school of those who are in favour of municipal enterprise and those of a contrary opinion. I rather dwell upon that because I observe 1852 that ill-informed comments have been made in the public Press upon the-action of your Lordships' Committee, which has been represented as being in pari materia with the action of your Lordships' House in the case of the Home Rule Bill or the Bill for the Disestablishment of the Welsh Church. The Select Committee were, I gather, absolutely satisfied that the proposal contained in this clause was a bad bargain for the public. That was the consideration that weighed with them, and I gather from the noble Lord who presided over the Committee that it also transpired that the Post Office had not thoroughly gone into this question and ascertained the relative advantages of resort to the existing companies and reliance upon electrical installations of their own. In these circumstances my inclination is to support the Select Committee, still more because it has had, in principle at any rate, the support of the noble Earl the Lord Chairman.
I am very much impressed by the argument which has been used that even if this clause remains out of the Bill, no harm will be done to the Post Office. The Post Office will go on with their line, which will obviously take some time to make, and they can come back next year for the powers they desire in regard to this particular point. I was surprised when I heard the noble Marquess suggest that the result of our action might he that the Post Office would drop their Bill. Why? I cannot conceive any justification for any action of the sort. The only element of doubt is that which arises out of an undertaking which it appears is offered to your Lordships by the Post Office. I gather that that undertaking, a very belated one, if I may say so, is to the effect that they would undertake not to use their right if, after taking tenders, it should prove to be the case that electricity supplied from outside sources would come cheaper to the public than a supply provided by the Post Office itself. That undertaking is a plausible one, but it comes to us at the last moment, and we have no opportunity of considering it. I do not know now whether most of your Lordships appreciate its full hearing, and I confess that my natural inclination would be to adopt the simpler course of resisting the Amendment which has been moved and supporting the action of the Select Committee.
§ LORD NEWTONPerhaps I may say a word before this question is decided. As far as I am concerned I am prepared to adopt the course suggested by my noble friend the Chairman of Committees, because I consider that we have on the whole obtained the principle for which we are contending. I hold that the Post Office have behaved with a petulance which is extremely unbecoming in a serious Public Department. At the same time I give it credit for honesty, and if the noble Marquess gives this undertaking I have every reason to believe that it will be adhered to. I confess I should much have preferred to see a proviso of this kind put into the Bill, and I can only repeat that much trouble would have been saved had a more accommodating spirit been shown by the Post Office in an earlier portion of the proceeding.
THE EARL OF CAMPERDOWNIf an undertaking of this kind is given, will it be inserted as a clause in the Bill?
THE MARQUESS OF CREWEI have no clause prepared, and, as the noble Lord will understand, I do not want to delay the passage of the Bill longer than is necessary. If noble Lords opposite make a point of it, I will consider whether it is possible to place any such undertaking in the form of an addition to the Bill; but I had set it forward as an undertaking by my right hon. friend the Postmaster-General, which, of course, is an undertaking by the Government, and we should see that it was carried out. I venture to think it would be a pity to delay the passage of the Bill further by attempting to devise a form of words, which noble Lords would agree would be of a somewhat unusual kind, in order to insert a proviso of this nature.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI do not know whether the proviso would be of an unusual kind; but, without desiring to say anything in the least bit aggressive, it must be admitted that the line which the Government have taken with regard to this question is an unusual one. We, of course, only desire to serve the public interest as far as we possibly can. To ask us to agree to an undertaking suggested like this at the last moment across the floor of the House, without any possibility of considering its form and precise effect and how the parties would be bound by it, seems to be asking a good deal 1854 of your Lordships' House, as the procedure is entirely exceptional. The noble Marquess when asking the House to make such an unusual departure from its procedure ought to formulate on paper definite words showing what is meant, words which can be inserted in the Bill. If that could be done it would be much more satisfactory to our sense as men of business, and I think nothing would be lost by doing so. Therefore if we postpone this discussion until to-morrow I should think that in the course of the next few hours the words could be formulated in the manner I have suggested. The great authority of my noble friend the Chairman of Committees is hardly sufficient to satisfy all of your Lordships straight off, without consideration, that the course proposed is the right one. If the noble Marquess wishes us to take his suggested course he ought to be willing to postpone this discussion until to-morrow, so that we may have an opportunity of seeing the words which he proposes to embody in the Bill as showing the undertaking His Majesty's Government have given.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWEI have no objection to postponing the further discussion of the Bill until to-morrow, and I will see, in consultation with my right hon. friend, whether it is possible to frame a form of words which will meet the objections of noble Lords opposite. But, of course, the noble Marquess will understand that I cannot promise to produce any words.
THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEESAs it is the intention to move this Amendment in a slightly altered form in order to carry out a pledge given to other parties, it would be better that it should be reprinted and circulated.
§ The further debate adjourned till To-morrow.