§ House again in Committee (according to Order).
§ LORD EMMOTT moved, after Clause 21, to insert the following new clause—
§ "22.—(I) the Minister and the Privy Council may respectively make rules in relation to the making of Orders and Orders in Council under this Act and to the publication of notices and advertisements, and the deposit of plans and 575 sections and books of reference to those plans, and the manner in which and the time within which representations or objections with reference to any Order or Order in Council are to be made, and to the holding of inquiries, and to any other matters arising in relation to their powers and duties under this Act.
§ "(2) Any rules made in pursuance of this section shall be laid before Parliament as soon as may be after they are made and shall have the same effect as if enacted in this Act."
§ The noble Lord said: This new clause is merely for the purpose of providing machinery which, without dogmatising on the question, appears to me to be necessary for the proper working of the Bill. By Clause 3 (1) (d) the Minister is empowered to authorise the owners of any undertaking to acquire land and easements compulsorily and to construct works, and by Clause 9 the Minister is authorised to establish works and transport services; but, by the second proviso, if compulsory acquisition of land is involved, the powers can only be exercised under an Order in Council, the draft of which is approved by both Houses. The powers granted in those two subsections are at present as a rule only obtained by special Act of Parliament, and in order to obtain such an Act promoters must comply with Standing Orders of a very stringent character, which require that adequate notice of proposals should be given publicly, and which, among other things, take care that interested parties have a full opportunity of laying their case before an impartial tribunal. The works contemplated in this Bill may be small or large, and there is no desire on my part, or on the part of anybody else who is supporting this proposal, to impede the construction of necessary works; but, whether the works be large or small, it seems only fair that adequate notice should be given of the works, and that any parties having legitimate objection should have a full opportunity of stating their case.
§ I repeat that this new clause is only meant to be necessary machinery Such items as the publication of notices and advertisements, the deposit of plans and sections and books of reference to those plans ought to be made public and under proper rules and regulations. Such rules are now, I understand, made in reference to Provisional Orders issued by the Local Government Board, or Provisional Orders by the Board of Trade dealing with tramways and electricity, and it therefore seems quite reasonable that similar provisions should apply in this Bill.
576§ May I here mention the second of the two clauses, because they really run together? the first deals with rules in relation to the Orders generally, the second deals with Regulations in reference to notices, objections, inquiries and the hearing of objections in regard to specific orders. On the face of it the form of the second new clause is rather curious, but it is taken from the precedent of the Electricity Supply Bill, which is now before another place. That is the reason why it is in the form proposed.
§
Amendment moved—
After clause 21, insert the said new clause.—(Lord Emmott.)
THE EARL OF LYTTONI have very carefully read the clauses which the noble Lord has put upon the Paper, and also listened with attention to the speech he has just delivered. I confess that I think he has made out a case which ought to be met. There are two points to which I think he desires to draw attention. First, that there is a lack of machinery in the Bill at the present moment for holding inquiries in connection with the acquisition of land, and that I think is an omission from the Bill which his Amendment will meet. Then I also feel that it is not altogether justifiable that land should be compulsorily acquired without some machinery for holding a public inquiry and enabling those affected to state their case. There are several points in the noble Lord's Amendments which I think go rather farther than he requires, or at any rate rather farther than I am prepared to concede to him. I hope, however, that if the noble Lord will withdraw his new clauses at this stage, between now and Report I may be able to come to an arrangement with him which will enable us to put an agreed clause upon the Paper for the Report stage. If as the result of communications with him we are unable to agree, he will still have the opportunity of putting down his clauses for the Report stage, and in that event I shall be able to state to your Lordships the points on which I have been unable to meet hint.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI think that the course the noble Earl proposes to adopt is a very proper one. The Amendment standing in the name of the noble Lord is undoubtedly an elaborate 577 one—though not too elaborate—which requires consideration, and the noble Earl is certainly entitled to full time for consideration of its tenour. But I should like to place upon record that so far as I am concerned, and those of your Lordships who have acted with us in these debates, we consider it a matter of very great importance that the Government should accept the Amendments of the noble Lord. I believe that we are discussing only the first of the noble Lord's clauses?
§ LORD EMMOTTI really spoke on the first two because they run together; but certainly not on the third.
§ TILE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYYes. As regards the first two the noble Earl in charge of the Bill has very frankly admitted that there is a lack of necessary machinery in the Bill.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYDoes the noble Earl accept those clauses now?
§ LORD EMMOTTinthe circumstances I certainly respond to the noble Earl's request. I shall be glad to discuss the matter with him on the terms he mentioned.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ LORD EMMOTT moved to insert the following new clause—
§ "—(1) If any objection to the making of any Order under section 3 (1) (do)f this Act or of any Order in Council under section 9 of this Act which have been stated in the prescribed manner and in the prescribed time shall allege that the proposals or some of the proposals are of such a character or magnitude or raise any such question of policy or principle that they ought to be dealt with by Bill in Parliament and not by Order or Order in Council, the Minister, or the Privy Council (as the case may be) shall forthwith inform the Chairman of Committees of the House of Lords and the Chairman of Ways and Means in the House of Commons (in this Act referred to as 'the Chairmen ') of all objections wind; have been stated to such proposals.
§ "(2) the chairmen shall thereupon take the proposals and the objections thereto into con- 578 sideration and report thereon to the Minister or the Privy Council (as the case may be) and if it appears from the report of the chairmen that, either of the chairmen is of opinion that the proposals or some of the proposals ought to be dealt with by Bill in Parliament and not by Order or Order in Council such Order or Order in Council shall not be proceeded with so far as the same is objected to by either of the chairmen.
§ "(3) A copy of such report shall as soon as possible be laid before both Houses of Parliament
§ "(4) The chairmen Wall determine all matters of practice or procedure which will enable them to take any such proposals into consideration, and to report thereon to the Minister or the Privy Council as the case may be."
§ The noble Lord said: I have a new third clause which is a different matter, because it introduces a different principle. I will be as brief as possible, but I should like to explain my reasons for proposing it. This Bill has aroused great interest in the House and in the country. I think that everyone must admit that it gives powers which are unusual and unprecedented. The case made for it is that there is at the present time a real necessity for a controlling authority to deal with the various kinds of transport. It is urged that there should be a speeding up of the machinery for dealing with the different rates of which we heard yesterday, or at any rate a large number of those rates, and we know that an alteration of rates is really necessitated by the enormous increase of cost for which the Government is financially responsible. It is also stated that there is need for an acceleration of procedure in regard to the provision of new schemes necessary to economise traffic or to shorten the routes by which the traffic is sent. On the other hand, as I have said, the powers of this Bill are so wide and so unprecedented that they need very careful examination. A strong general case in theory can of course be made out for this Bill, but undoubtedly if the powers given by it as it stands to a Minister were abused by some megalomaniac in days to come there might be an enormous waste of public money under it.
§ In these circumstances there is a good deal of mistrust of this Bill in your Lordships' House and in the country at large amongst responsible people. I do not think that mistrust—I am very glad to make this statement—is really of the Minister-designate, but it is felt that whatever appears in the terms of the Bill as to its only affecting the next two years, with a possible increase to 18 months in certain 579 respects, this Bill or some modification of it will last a great deal longer than two years. Therefore we are faced with the danger that with a different Minister and a different Government acts of a very serious character might be taken under this Bill and that there would be no adequate check. That being the case this Amendment has been put down, not of course with any desire to hamper the Minister with regard to small matters, but under the feeling that the wide powers given under paragraph (d) of subsection (1) of clause 3 and by the Orders in Council under Clause 9, do seem to need some check of an impartial and judicial character.
§ It is to provide such a check that this clause which I now propose is put forward. It only operates in the case of schemes of magnitude. The clause is drawn on the lines of the well-known Scottish Private Bill procedure. It would enact that if the schemes proposed by the Minister were of such a character or magnitude, or raised any such question of policy or principle as ought to be dealt with by a Bill in Parliament, then the two Chairmen—the Lord Chairman of this House and the Chairman of Ways and Means in the other House—would sit together, and if either of them gave it as his opinion that the schemes were of such magnitude that they ought to go by Bill, then they would have to be dealt with by Bill.
§ This system, which is applied to Provisional Orders in the Scottish Private Bill procedure, I am of course familiar with. I had the honour of being chairman of Ways and Means for six years, and in regard to the working of the Scottish Bill procedure I never had the slightest difficulty in agreeing with either of the two Lord Chairmen with whom I had to deal—the late Lord Onslow or Earl Donoughmore—with regard to any matter that arose before us. We always approached questions judicially, and I have never heard with regard to decisions made at that time, or before that time by the present Speaker and Lord Onslow, or by Mr. Whitley, the Chairman of Ways and Means in the other House, and the Lord Chairman here, any serious complaint of any decision arrived at. The scheme has, I believe, worked well, and I think a similar scheme would work well in this case.
§ I can only anticipate one possible objection that might be made—that it would come within the power of any objector in 580 regard to any scheme to raise the plea that it was a scheme of such magnitude, or raised such questions of policy and principle, that the case would have to be heard by the two Chairmen. That is a possible objection, but, if I may say so with respect, it is rather a Parliamentary objection than a real one. More or less it is the case as regards all private Bill legislation, and I think the tribunal in this case—a tried and experienced tribunal—can be trusted to dispose of trivial objections and to deal with them in such a way that they are unlikely really to be made in years to come. In all probability there would be very few Bills for them to adjudicate upon in any one year. I do not want to detain your Lordships, and I have given the case for the new clause very briefly. I earnestly recommend the scheme both to the supporters and the critics of the Bill. It does not hamper the Minister in any greater matters and the powers given in the Bill are so wide and so unprecedented that a competent tribunal of this kind, acting judicially, would be a great safeguard, and a safeguard which, I think, would appeal to all fair-minded men. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
After Clause 21, insert the said new clause.—(Lord Emmott.)
THE EARL OF LYTTONI am very grateful to the noble. Lord for having stated his case now and also for the spirit of his remarks. It will certainly be a help to me to know the objects with which he moved the Amendment and I will certainly do my best to meet him when we come to consider the matter.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI should like, in view of the importance of the consideration the noble Earl is going to give to the matter, to impress upon him and also to represent to your Lordships, the very great weight of authority with which the noble Lord speaks on all matters and particularly upon this one, because we have the experience of a Chairman of Ways and Means who has actually worked this procedure and knows how it operates. I do think that will not only have great weight with your Lordships but also in another place, because it is a report made by one of its former officers, a very distinguished occupant of the Chair, who is able to say to your Lordships and through Ministers, to another place, how well the 581 system works. I earnestly hope it may be considered a good reason why the Government should accept the Amendment, and accept it more or less in the form in which he proposes it. I do not think a mere inquiry, unless it was protected by the traditional machinery of a Private Bill Committee, in this special case would be satisfactory.
§ LORD EMMOTTI presume the noble Earl wishes me to withdraw?
§ LORD EMMOTTI will do so.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause 22 agreed to.
§ Clause 23:
THF EARL OF LYTTONthe next Amendment is consequential upon an Amendment made inanother place, and is drafting.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 23, line 29, leave out ("one of the Parliamentary Secretaries") and insert ("the Parliamentary Secretary").—(The Earl of Lytton.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 23, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 24:
THE EARL OF LYTTONthe Amendments in the name of Lord Oranmore and Browne are drafting, and I move them on his behalf.
§ Amendments moved—
§ Page 24, line 15 leave out ("ways and communications") and insert ("transport").
§ Page 24, line 27, leave out ("ways and communications") and insert ("transport")
§ Page 24, line 29, leave out ("ways and communications") and insert ("transport")
§ Page 25, line 2, leave out ("ways and communications") and insert ("transport")
§ Page 25, line 3, leave out ("ways and communications") and insert ("transport").—(The Earl of Lytton.)
§ On Question, Amendments agreed to.
§ Clause 24, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 25:
582§ Amendments moved—
§ Page 25, lines 5 and 6, leave out ("ways and Communications") and insert ("transport")
§ Page 25, lines 6 and leave out ("ways and communications") and insert ("transport").—(The Earl of Lytton.)
§ On Question, Amendments agreed to.
§ Clause 25, as amended, agreed to.
§ Clause 26:
THE EARL OF LYTTONThe next is a drafting amendment. I am proposing later on to move out subsection from end of Bill ors Page 26, where it is out of place, for purpose of inserting it here.
§ Amendment moved—
§
Page 25, line 18, at end insert:
(2) An Order in Council under this Act may be altered or revoked by a subsequent order.—(The Earl of Lytton.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 27:
THE EARL OF LYTTONLord Oranmore and Browne has a drafting Amendment on this clause, this I beg to move it.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 25, lines 19 and 20, leave out ("ways and communications") and insert ("transport").—(The Earl of Lytton.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 25, line 21, after ("Act") insert ("unless context otherwise requires").—(The Earl of Lytton.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ LORD RITCHIE OF DUNDEE moved, subsection (2), before "departments" to leave out "or other public." noble Lord said: I move this Amendment to give noble Earl an opportunity of telling us what is meaning of "other public departments." A discussion of question arose to whether words included such bodies as London County Council and Corporation of City of London noble Earl said they did not, but on being pressed to tell us what they really meant, said he did not know, but he would make inquiries and inform us later.
583
§
Amendment moved—
Page 25, line 22, leave out ("or other public").—(Lord Ritchie of Dundee.)
THE EARL OF LYTTONThe noble Lord is quite right. On being pressed by the Marquess of Crewe I was unable to give the meaning of these words, but I find on inquiry that they were inserted to cover the case of Departments in Ireland which could not be described as Government Departments. They are the Congested Districts Board and the Irish Board of Works. They do not refer to the Department to which Lord Devonport referred and of which the noble Lord speaks.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 25, line 29, after ("system") insert ("and the expression 'easement' includes any right in or over land").—(The Earl of Lytton.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 26, lines 6 and 7, leave out subsection (3).—(The Earl of Lytton.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU had an Amendment on the Paper, after subsection (3), to insert the following new subsection: "(4) For the purposes of the Regulation of Forces Act, 1871, and this Act, possession 'shall mean direction or control, but shall not include actual possession, nor shall any undertaking nor any part thereof, by virtue of such possession being retained or taken, be vested in the Minister." The noble Lord said: I have put down this Amendment in order to obtain a declaration from the Government as to the meaning of the word "possession." I understand the noble Earl is ready to meet me on this Amendment.
THE EARL OF LYTTONOn an Amendment of Lord Islington I undertook to look into this point to see whether words could not be inserted to make it quite clear that the word "possession" did not imply "ownership." I think this is the proper place to deal with the matter. Your Lordships will remember that there were 584 two points which I desired to safeguard. One was that there should be no distinction between "possession" under the Act of 1871 and "possession" under this Bill, and the other was, that no words were inserted in this Bill which would be taken as interpreting the Act of 1871.
I think the words which I will move will meet the point completely, and I hope be satisfactory to the noble Lord. I propose to insert, in the place of his Amendment, the following words—
Possession of an undertaking, taken or retained under this Act, shall confer on the Minister such rights of control and direction as may be necessary for the exercise of his powers under this Act, but shall not confer upon him any rights of ownership.I think those words will make the matter clear, and I beg to move them in that form.
§ Amendment moved—
§
Page 26, line 7, after subsection (3) insert the following new subsection:—
Possession of an undertaking, taken or retained under this Act, shall confer on the Minister such rights of control and direction as may be necessary for the exercise of his powers under this Act, but shall not confer upon him any rights of ownership."—(The Earl of Lytton.)
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUI am much obliged to the noble Earl. It meets my view to a large extent.
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 27, as amended, agreed to.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU moved to insert the following new clauses—
§ 28. The council of any county or county borough may with the approval of the Minister make byelaws and regulations prescribing the distance from the centre of any main road within which no new building shall be erected.
§ 29. The council of any county may contract with the council of any urban or rural district within the area of such county council for the maintenance by such county council of any roads, the expenses of which are borne by such urban or rural district council, upon such terms and conditions as may be agreed between them respectively.
§ 30. With a view to carrying out the powers conferred by this Act and advising and assisting the Minister or any local authority in relation to the construction, improvement, and maintenance of roads, bridges and ferries, the establishment of railways, light railways and tramways, and the promotion and improvement of transport services, by land and water, His Majesty in Council may by Order authorise the Minister—
- (a) to constitute local traffic boards;
- (b) to define the membership of such boards and the areas over which they may respectively exercise jurisdiction;
- (c) to delegate to such boards respectively any powers or duties of the Minister in relation to the above purposes.
§ 31. His Majesty in Council may by Order make such incidental, consequential and supplemental provisions as may be necessary or expedient for the purpose of giving full effect to the powers or duties of the Minister delegated to such boards tinder this section including provisions that the expenses of such boards shall be met by the Minister, and that such Boards may promote Bills in Parliament and may make application to any Government Department for Provisional Orders under any Act in relation thereto, and may make such adaptions in the enactments relating to such powers or duties as may be necessary for such purposes.
§ The noble Lord said: These Amendments are put down in order to facilitate good county and district council government. There are a great many difficulties now in county council and district council government which arise out of the fact that the interchange of areas in road administration is not easy. As regards Clause 28, this Amendment is desirable in the interest of making good roads or streets. Clause 29 simply says that a county council may contract with the council of any urban or rural district within its area for the maintenance by such county council of any roads, etc. There are many small district councils whose areas are so small and rateable value so small that it is almost impossible for them to retain the services or pay properly a really competent road surveyor, and I propose that such a district council should be allowed to contract with the county council for the upkeep of the roads in its area, which I think would tend to the making of good roads and the saving of expense and prevention of waste.
§ Then, Clause 30 enables local traffic boards to be constituted. I suggest this might meet a very urgent case; namely, the case of constituting a London Traffic Board. There might also be traffic boards for Liverpool and Manchester combined, and for other great areas. Then Clause 31 is simply an enabling clause. I suggest that these proposed new clauses are of a useful and constructive nature. They have been put down with a genuine desire to assist the working of the Bill, and especially with regard to Clause 30, now that a Parliamentary Committee has reported in favour of a Traffic Board for London. I think it might assist the solution of that problem.
§
Amendment moved.
After Clause 27, insert the said new clauses.—(Lord Montagu of Beaulieu.)
THE EARL OF LYTTONI quite appreciate the spirit in which these clauses have been put forward. I have, however some difficulty in dealing with them. The first two clauses are, I think, really relevant to this Bill, but they are Amendments to the Highways Act and to a certain extent even co the Building Act, and I feel that other Government Departments are involved in the matter; and I have not had any opportunity of conferring with the Ministry of Health or other Department concerned. To the first two proposed new clauses I have no objection from the point of view of this Bill, but I hesitate; to accept them because I have not consulted the other Departments concerned. I am pretty sure, also, that they would be ruled out of order in another place.
The proposed Clauses 30 and 31 are clearly relevant to the Bill, but there I have objections from the point of view of the Bill. The noble Lord proposes to insert Clauses which would constitute local traffic boards, to which he suggests that the Minister should delegate practically the whole of the powers which are given to him under this Bill. That is a suggestion which goes far beyond anything which I can accept; and when we come to Clause 31, the noble Lord suggests that these traffic boards may promote Bills in Parliament. I would point out to your Lordships that even rural district councils to-day have no power to promote Bills in Parliament, and these traffic boards would be bodies without even the authority of rural district councils. That, I think, is a very strong order—to ask that the whole powers of the Ministry should be delegated to these small bodies. For this reason, although I quite appreciate the reasons which have induced the noble Lord to put these clauses down, I am unable to accept them.
§ LORD SHANDONWith regard to this Amendment, I do not know whether the noble Lord who his moved it has quite appreciated the great difference between the law in England and in Ireland with respect to roads. This distinction between main roads and roads that are not main roads in England does not exist in Ireland. In Ireland we have roads that are kept up by presentment by the county council, and roads that are not. With regard to capital provision, there is a statutory restriction which exists, I think, in England in respect 587 to main roads but which exists in Ireland, as I understand, with respect to all roads kept up by presentment. That is, you cannot erect new buildings within 20 feet of the centre of the road. The result might be very serious if this Amendment were passed. Large numbers of the roads in Ireland kept up by presentment are exceedingly narrow and buildings have been erected at each side of these narrow roads. It has always been a question, What is a new building and what is an encroachment?" I suggest to the Government that in dealing with Leland they would be well advised to further consider the matter before accepting the Amendment.
§ VISCOUNT CHURCHILLIn the event of there being any question of this new clause being accepted I hope the Government will bear in mind the exemption which has always been extended to railway companies with regard to buildings.
THE EARL OF LYTTONI did not accept the Amendment, I merely pointed out that it concerned other interests. I could not accept it without further investigation.
§ LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEUNo doubt it will be convenient if I put it down again on Report. Possibly the Government may consider it. I would be obliged if the Government would also consider Clause 28, 29 and 30. After what the noble Earl has said I will not press these Amendments now but will put them down again on Report. Perhaps the noble Earl will consider them between now and Report and come to some final decision.
§ Amendments, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Schedules agreed to.
§ Title:
§
Amendment moved—
Page 1, leave out ("ways and communications") and insert ("transport").—(The Earl of Lytton.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Title, as amended, agreed to.
§ House resumed.