§ Amendments reported (according to Order).
§ Clause 3:
§ Power to conduct experiments.
§ 3. The Electricity Commissioners may, either by themselves or through any joint electricity authority established under this Act, or any authorised undertakers, or other competent body, conduct experiments or trials for the improvement of the methods of electric supply or of the utilisation of fuel, and, subject to the approval of the Board of Trade, incur such expenditure as may be necessary for the purpose.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR (LORD BIRKENHEAD) moved in Clause 3, after "fuel," to insert "or water power." The noble and learned Lord said: This Amendment extends the purposes for which the Electricity Commissioners or bodies appointed by them may conduct experiments, so as to include experiments for utilising water power. It is felt that this may be useful in view of the Inquiry now being undertaken by the Water Power Resources Committee. As far as I know, there is no opposition to this Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 2, line 28, after ("fuel") insert ("or water power").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 6:
§ Joint electricity authorities.
§ 6.—(1) A scheme under the last-foregoing section may provide for the establishment and (where desirable) the incorporation with power to hold land without licence in mortmain, of a joint electricity authority representative of authorised undertakers within the electricity district, either with or without the addition of 450 representatives of the council of any county situate wholly or partly within the electricity district, local authorities, large consumers of electricity, and other interests within the electricity district, and, subject as hereinafter in this Act provided, for the exercise by that authority of all or any of the powers of the authorised undertakers within the electricity district, and for the transfer to the authority of the whole or any part of the undertakings of any of those undertakers, upon such terms as may be provided by the scheme, and the scheme may contain any consequential, incidental, and supplemental provisions which appear to be expedient or proper for the purpose of the scheme, including provisions determining the area included in the electricity district:
§ Provided that no such scheme shall provide, for the transfer to the authority of any part of an undertaking except with the consent of the owners thereof.
§ (2) The scheme may provide for enabling the joint electricity authority to delegate, with or without restrictions, to committees of the authority any of the powers or duties of the authority, and for the payment out of the revenues of the authority of travelling and subsistence expenses of members of the authority, and reasonable compensation for loss of remunerative time.
§ LORD MONK BRETTON moved in Clause 6, in the first half of subsection (1), to leave out "either" and to leave out "or without." The noble Lord said: The object of this Amendment is to ensure the representation of county councils on the joint electricity authorities. It was a power given to all the boards in the Bill before it was amended by the Amendments of the noble and learned Lord, and therefore we think that the same rule should apply with regard to the electrical authority, at any rate to enable them to send representatives if they so desire. The noble and learned Lord will remember that there is no representation of consumers assured on the electrical authority, and therefore the argument has weight because they will be the only people who could represent consumers. The noble and learned Lord will remember the great importance that was attached in another place to the position of local authorities with regard to this Bill, and how much it was pressed on the Second Reading. It is pressed now on behalf of the County Councils Association, who feel very strongly in this matter. I would call attention to the Amendment next on the Paper to mine standing in the name of the noble Marquess, Lord Crewe. Lord Crewe's Amendment is in the same sense, but it is a very much stronger Amendment. It is not only to obtain representation on the authority, but to insist that local authorities should have a positive majority. If 451 the noble and learned Lord accepts Lord Crewe's Amendment then I will not move, but if he is not prepared to go as far as that perhaps he would accept the Amendment that I have put down.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 4, line 10, leave out ("either") and leave out ("or without").—(Lord Monk Bretton.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORThis Amendment and an Amendment by the noble Lord in line 12 are Amendments which it is not possible to accept. I think he will appreciate the reason why. The effect of them—and, as the noble Lord has quite truly said, it appears in a more marked degree in Lord Crewe's Amendment—would be to make it obligatory to include in the joint electricity authority representatives of county councils, large consumers, and other interests, and to give an option to local authorities to be represented. Hitherto, except to a limited extent in Scotland, county councils have not taken any active part in electric supply. They are not even local authorities for the purposes of the Electric Lighting Acts. We have gone as far in the circumstances as it was possible for administrative reasons to go in providing in Clause 5 (2) that county councils should have opportunities of inquiry. Nothing can take place without their knowledge, or without their being given notice. If a county council is interested in a scheme it will no doubt be represented on the Joint Electricity Authority, and it would make it absurd for a county council to be represented where it was not interested, and it would certainly resent being dragged into the matter at all.
LORD MONK BRETTONI am much obliged for the assurance that if a county council is interested it will be called to representation on the Electricity Authority. That is how I understand the statement of the noble and learned Lord. I think there may be county councils that may be interested in the matter, because I think at any rate in the Report of the Commission on which this Bill is founded it is anticipated that electricity will be used largely in rural areas and even for agricultural purposes, and I gather that in that case county councils will be called to representation on the Board. As I can get no more I am grateful to the noble Lord and accept his assurance.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI am anxious that the noble Lord should not misunderstand. I think he does get what he really cares about under the provisions of Clause 5 (2), which provides for the county councils getting notice of the intention to hold an inquiry, and an opportunity of submitting a scheme.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ THE MARQUESS OF CREWE moved, in subsection (1), after "district," to insert "provided that the majority of the members of such authority shall be representative of local authorities." The noble Marquess said: This, of course, might on the face of it seem to reverse the general policy of the Bill and place the whole control of management of electrical undertakings in the hands of the local authorities instead of the companies who have been working them. But it will be noted that in line 14 of the clause occur the words—"subject as hereinafter in this Act provided, for the exercise by that authority of all or any of the powers of the authorised undertakers," and, of course, it is possible for those words to limit the powers which the local authority will acquire in respect of any particular undertaking. As a general principle, when these great electrical authorities are to be created it appears reasonable that the local bodies concerned should have a majority of representation. There is some matter of principle involved in this. I hope, therefore, that His Majesty's Government may see their way to accept the Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 4, line 16, after ("district.") insert ("provided that the majority of the members of such authority shall be representative of local authorities").—(The Marquess of Crewe.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORThe objections to this proposal are in substance the objections which I have just stated in relation to proposals which did not go quite so far. This proposal was debated at length in the Standing Committee of the House of Commons, it was again mentioned on Third Reading, and the Amendment was rejected on both those occasions. I do not think that the risk apprehended by the noble Marquess will be found on reflection to be a very real one. Where, as is the case in many districts, there is a majority of local authority undertakings it is quite evident that a joint electricity authority 453 formed by them would have a majority of municipal representation. In most places the majority of undertakings is formed of companies, and I cannot really appreciate the argument which would support the view that it is either expedient or possible to insist upon a municipal majority on the undertaking. If the undertakings are formed of companies, why should a majority of municipal representatives be entrusted with the control? Such a position would completely destroy the flexibility which is aimed at in the joint authorities. A great part of the criticism against this Bill on the Second Reading was based on the view that, in the form in which it was presented to your Lordships originally, it might have the effect of stifling private enterprise. If the Bill is not to have that effect, it is essential that the companies should continue their activities and that they should receive every encouragement that it is possible to give them. If you are going artificially to insert a rule that in every case a majority of the members of the electricity authority should be representatives of the local authorities, it is clear that what you would be doing would be to arm corporation enterprises as against private enterprises, which latter, on the Second Reading, your Lordships were most desirous of encouraging.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWEIt is clear that I cannot press this particular Amendment against the objection mentioned by the noble and learned Lord.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ THE MARQUESS OF CREWE moved, at the end of subsection (1), to insert "provided also that such provision dealing with the rights of purchase vested in the London County Council shall provide for adequate representation of that Council on the authority for the district in which the rights are to be exercised."
§ The noble Marquess said: This Amendment deals with a somewhat different point. In the Bill as it was when there were district boards in contemplation as well as district authorities, these words occurred, after the words in line 20 of the Bill, "provisions which appear to be expedient or proper for the purpose of the scheme including "—(then these words were to be found)—"provisions dealing with any right of purchase of any undertakings affected by the scheme." Those latter words have 454 disappeared. That is to say, although the district boards were to be subject to the necessity of considering those rights of purchase, the district authorities were not. I therefore desire to move this Amendment so far as it affects the London County Council. But I may ask the noble and learned Lord to consider whether there is not a different way in which the same object might be achieved if he dislikes this particular Amendment. Would be turn to Clause 12 (2)?
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI have looked at that.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWEI would suggest that Clause 12 (2), after saying "where under the Electric Lighting Acts … any right to purchase is vested in a local authority," should then read: "may by any scheme under this Act to constitute a joint electricity authority for the district comprising the area of the local authority be transferred to and vest in the joint electricity authority"; and then insert the words: "subject to the scheme providing for adequate representation on the joint electricity authority of the local authority from whom the right is transferred." That in a general form would bring about the particular amendment which the London County Council desire. Perhaps I might mention that I am asked to move the Amendment in this form by the London County Council. The noble Lord who is Chairman of the County Council is not in a position to deal with these matters because he himself is, I believe, a very efficient chairman of some electric concerns.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 4, after line 25, insert ("provided also that such provision dealing with the rights of purchase vested in the London County Council shall provide for adequate representation of that Council on the authority for the district in which the rights are to be exercised").—(The Marquess of Crewe.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI appreciate what the noble Marquess has said about the noble Lord who is Chairman of the London County Council, but the circumstance mentioned by him did not prevent the noble Lord making a vigorous speech on the subject. I agree with the noble Marquess that this is not the place to insert this Amendment on its merits. By Clause 12 (2) the powers of purchase vested in the London County Council are, 455 as the noble Marquess says, transferred to the joint electrcity authority. It may be argued that the representation of the London County Council qua purchasing authority is somewhat appropriate; but the noble Marquess's purpose could be discussed on Clause 12 (2), and, without in any way committing myself at this moment, if he will be so good as to put on paper the Amendment he proposes on that clause I will try and consider it in the time at my disposal.
THE MARQUESS OF CREWEI will certainly endeavour to meet the wishes of the noble and learned Lord, and therefore I withdraw this Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§
LORD SYDENHAM moved, in subsection (2), after "authority" where that word thirdly occurs, to insert "or to a company constituted for the purpose." The noble Lord said: There is one word which has gone wrong in my Amendment on the Paper; it should read "or to a company constituted for the purpose" and not "through a company." In the speech of the Prime Minister at Manchester the other day he made this important observation—
The State must educate; the State must assist where necessary; the State must control where necessary; the State must shield the weak against the arrogance of the strong.
That is a very wise definition of the rightful and proper functions of the State towards commerce and industry. Then followed these very pregnant words, also quoted by Lord Inchcape in the Second Reading debate. The Prime Minister said—
The life of the State springs from individual energy and enterprise.
§ Now this Bill as transformed by the noble and learned Lord on the Woolsack goes far to fulfil the conditions laid down by the Prime Minister. If we are ever to have cheap electricity it will be only by employing private enterprise to the fullest extent, subject to the conditions laid down by the Prime Minister. This Amendment is intended to enlarge the possible scope of private enterprise by enabling the Commissioners if they choose, and only if they choose, to employ it as an alternative to the committees of the authority. Capital may be required in these cases and the public does not much like committees, but may find money for a company which is believed to be thoroughly capable of carry- 456 ing out this important work. This Amendment only restores what was in the original Bill and was defeated by 12 votes to 7 in a Committee of 74. Thus, out of 710 members of the House of Commons only twelve voted against it.
§ I need hardly say that the principle of employing operating companies is a well-known and widely resorted to arrangement. Some of the great Indian railways, which are very well managed, are now in that position. In 1914 the London County Council deposited a Bill for dealing with the London electricity supply. It was based upon that principle. In the same year the city of Paris bought up all their electrical undertakings and decided they would start an operating company to work them. I could give many other instances of the same kind, but I do not wish to take up the time of the House. I hope the Government will stand by its original intentions and accept the Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 4, line 28, after the second ("authority") insert ("or to a company constituted for the purpose."—(Lord Sydenham.)
§ VISCOUNT HALDANEIn the past we have not profited much by private enterprise in supplying electricity in this fashion. We are paying for it three times or rather more as much as we should, but on this occasion I am rather in sympathy with the noble Lord who has spoken. In 1914 the London County Council took up again a project which had come before Parliament some years before and very nearly passed. I watched that closely at the time. What was found was that you could constitute a company under proper control, with limitations of profits and proper regulations, which was likely to be able to do the work very much better than it could be done by a local authority. In the north-eastern counties of Northumberland and Durham we have an illustration of something of the kind going on.
Speaking for myself, although I am very jealous about prices being put up by want of organisation of private enterprise, I feel that we should make a mistake if in appropriate cases, we lost the valuable assistance which a highly organised company under proper control could give. Experience has shown that you can constitute such companies, and that they fulfil the purpose. My difficulty is this. This was an Amendment thoroughly appro- 457 priate to Clause 16 of the original Bill which has now gone out, and it comes up again, in a somewhat shorn form, in the words which the noble Lord proposes to introduce. I would suggest that the Government should consider this question carefully and it may be that at a later stage—and even on the second Bill—the appropriate place to introduce it will occur. I am not quite satisfied as to the words being sufficient to give the control in the interests of the public which I consider should be given; but I think the point raised is an important one and it is one which I should like to see carefully considered and brought into operation in the proper place in the scheme of legislation.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI agree with my noble and learned friend who spoke last that this Amendment ought to have been brought forward in relation to a part of the Bill which has temporarily disappeared, and I would call the attention of the noble Lord who moved it to a doubt I feel as to whether it will even read in its present form. Clause 6, subsection (2), which is to be amended by the words proposed to be introduced in line 28, would, if the noble Lord's words were added, read in this way—
The scheme may provide for enabling the Joint Electricity Authority to delegate, with or without restrictions, to Committees of the Authority any of the powers or duties of the Authority—So far it is perfectly plain. All it does is to say that the Joint Electricity Authority may delegate any of its powers to Committees of the Authority. Then it would go on—or to a company constituted for the purpose.I do not think it reads at all. I can neither construe it as a lawyer nor read it. So much for the drafting. I may be in error, but I do not think I am.On the substance the Amendment would seem to be entirely inapropriate to such a delegation. As originally proposed the Bill provided that the Electricity Board might be so authorised by the Electricity Commissioners to exercise their powers through any authorised undertaking, or through a Committee established for the purpose. When that provision was in the Bill, in Standing Committee in the House of Commons, the power to act through a company established for the purpose was very strongly resisted in an intelligible and co- 458 herent Amendment and rejected on a Division. Even acting through authorised undertakers was made the subject of special procedure. Now that the whole of the clause for the exercise of the powers of the Joint Electricity Authority through other bodies has been withdrawn from the Bill, it would appear to be singularly inappropriate to insert in Clause 6, subsection (2), a provision which was most strongly criticised in connection with the clause where it might have been appropriate. If the noble Lord will re-read Clause 6 (2) he will realise how partial is the scope of the proposal, but whatever the merits of the proposal in the Bill as originally introduced, and whatever merits it may still have in the residue of the Bill as re-introduced, the Amendment could not, as a matter of drafting, be accepted in the present form.
§ LORD SYDENHAMI am afraid the revolution in the Bill has rather upset my drafting, and I admit the criticism of the noble and learned Lord, but I hope the question will be considered again when the second part of the Bill conies before your Lordships' House.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORFor these sudden changes the House is partly responsible and I am partly responsible.
§ LORD SYDENHAMI beg to withdraw.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause 7:
§ Confirmation of schemes.
§ 7.—(1) The Electricity Commissioners may make an order giving effect to the schemes embodying decisions they arrive at as the result of such inquiry as aforesaid, and present the order for confirmation by the Board of Trade, who may confirm the order either without modification or subject to such modifications as they think fit.
§ (2) Any such order shall be laid, as soon as may be after it is made, before each House of Parliament, but shall not come into operation unless and until it has been approved either with or without modification by a resolution passed by each such House, and when so approved shall have effect as if enacted in this Act.
§ (3) An order made under this section may be altered by a subsequent order made, confirmed, and approved in like manner as the original order.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI have a drafting Amendment on this clause.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 4, line 39, leave out ("made") and insert ("confirmed").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
459
§
LORD MUIR, MACKENZIE moved to insert, at the end of the clause, the following new subsection—
Where under this Act an order or special order has been laid before each House of Parliament and a petition is presented to either House against the order or special order by or on behalf of any local authority, company, or person interested, the order or special order may on motion be referred to a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament for consideration and report.
§ The noble Lord said: A good deal of importance has been attached to this Amendment by persons outside the House who are deserving of great consideration, and I think myself that there is great importance in it. The substance of it really is that people objecting to Orders or special Orders under the Bill should have an opportunity of being heard as objectors generally are to Orders of this kind before a Committee of this House, or, still better, before a Joint Committee of both Houses. It has struck me on reconsideration that the Amendment, though of importance to the Bill as it was originally introduced—and I am sorry it has not been proceeded with in that form—is no longer of anything like the same importance, and I will only ask the noble and learned Lord if he will take this matter into serious consideration, when he is engaged on the preparation of the Bill which we understand is likely to come on next session.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 5, line 6, at end insert the said new subsection.—(Lord Muir Mackenzie.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI will certainly consider anything the noble Lord proposes, because he has had great experience in these matters. I would point out that it may be worth his while to consider whether the Amendment is necessary. The two Houses of Parliament can always refer any matter to a Joint Committee of both Houses, and nothing would be gained by saying that where a petition is presented the Order may, on a Motion, be referred to a Joint Committee.
THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (THE EARL OF DONOUGHMORE)I should like entirely to support what the noble and learned Lord has said. Your Lordships, or the other House, are entitled to refer any matter to a Joint Committee or to a Committee of their own. The only difficulty that may sometimes occur is that some Orders may lie on the Table for a 460 limited time, and that time, limited, may not be sufficient for the Committee to meet and do its duty adequately. I am sure both my noble friends will keep that point in mind in considering the question.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI hope that the noble Earl, between now and the resumption of our discussions in the new session, will keep his attention on this point so that we can consider it.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Clause 8:
§ General powers and duties of joint electricity authorities.
§ 8.—(1) It shall be the duty of every joint electricity authority constituted under this Act to provide or secure the provision of a cheap and abundant supply of electricity within their district, and for that purpose every such authority shall have such powers and duties as are conferred or imposed upon them respectively by the scheme under which they are constituted or by this Act with respect to—
- (a) the supply of electricity within their district (including the construction of generating stations, main transmission lines, and other works required for the purpose);
- (b) the acquisition of the undertakings or parts of the undertakings of authorised distributors;
§ (2) A joint electricity authority may, with the approval of the Electricity Commissioners, establish or join with any other such authority in establishing a scheme for the payment of superannuation allowances and gratuities to any of their officers and servants who become incapable of discharging their duties by reason of permanent infirmity of body and mind or old age upon their resigning or otherwise ceasing to hold office, and the expenses incurred under any such scheme shall be treated as part of the expenses of the authority in carrying out their powers and duties under this Act.
§ A joint electricity authority may, with the consent of the Electricity Commissioners, by agreement with the owners thereof acquire any railway generating station, dock generating station or private generating station or any main transmission line from any such station on such terms as may be agreed.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORThe Amendment on page 5, line 11, is merely drafting.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 5, line 11, leave out ("respectively").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
461§ THE LORD CHANCELLORThe next Amendment on line 19 is also drafting.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 5, line 19, leave out ("distributors") and insert ("undertakers.")—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved, in Clause 8, subsection (2), to leave out the words "railway generating station, dock generating station or private generating." The noble and learned Lord said: The provision for the acquisition of railway generating stations, dock generating stations and private generating stations by agreement with the owners was excluded from the provision for the compulsory acquisition of generating stations originally in the Bill. Now that this compulsory provision has been omitted it is desirable to insert that the joint electricity authority should have power to acquire, by agreement, public generating stations as well as railway, dock, and private generating stations. In those circumstances it is meaningless to specify these last named.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 5, line 37, leave out from ("any") to ("generating") in line 38.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 11:
§ Powers of joint electricity authorities in respect of the supply of electricity.
§
11.—(1) A joint electricity authority shall have power to supply electricity within their district subject to the following limitations, that is to say, the authority shall not supply electricity—
(a) in any area which for the time being forms part of the area of supply of any authorised distributors without the consent of those distributors, except to railway, canal, or inland navigation companies, or authorities for the purposes of traction or haulage, or for lighting vehicles and vessels for the haulage or traction of which electricity is supplied; or
§ LORD ERSKINE, on behalf of Lord MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU, moved in subsection (1) (a), after "haulage," to insert "or for the purpose of charging or recharging electric vehicles not running on rails."
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI will accept this Amendment.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 7, line 31, after ("haulage") insert ("or for the purpose of charging or re-charging electric vehicles not running on rails.—(Lord Erskine.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORThe next Amendment is purely drafting.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 8, line 15, after ("are") insert ("respectively").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORThe next Amendment is also drafting.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 8, line 16, leave out ("the terms upon which") and insert ("where").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORThe Amendment on line 18 is also drafting.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 8, line 18, after ("authority" insert ("the terms upon which they are so supplied.")—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 12:
§ (2) Where under the Electric Lighting Acts, or under any order made thereunder or under any special or local Act, any right to purchase the whole or any part of the undertaking of any authorised distributors is vested in any local authority (including a county council), the right shall on the constitution of a joint electricity authority for the district comprising the area of the local authority be transferred to and vest in the joint electricity authority, and any order or Act conferring any such right shall be construed accordingly:
§ Provided that—
- (a) if the area of the local authority is situate partly in the district of one joint electricity authority and partly in that of another the right shall be transferred to such one of those joint electricity authorities or divided between them as the Electricity Commissioners may determine, and where part of such area is situate in a locality which is not included in an electricity district the right of purchasing that part may, if the Electricity Commissioners consent, be transferred to a joint electricity authority within whose district any part of such area is situate; and
- (b) where the distributors are themselves a local authority, the right so transferred to the joint electricity authority shall not be exercised, except with the consent of the Electricity Commissioners.
§ THE MARQUESS OF CREWE moved, in Clause 12, subsection (2), to leave out from "shall" ["shall on the constitution of"] to the end of the first paragraph and to insert: "may by any scheme under this Act to constitute a joint electricity authority for the district comprising the area of the local authority be transferred to and vest in the joint electricity authority subject to the scheme providing for adequate representation on the joint electricity authority of the local authority from whom the right is transferred." The noble Marquess said: I need not repeat what I said on Clause 6, but I would remind your Lordships that in Clause 6 as originally drafted there was a provision dealing with the right of purchase. I hope the Lord Chancellor will not object to the insertion of these words.
§
Amendment moved—
Clause 12, subsection (2) after ("right") insert the said words.—(The Marquess of Crewe.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORSubject to a verbal alteration, which I think the noble Marquess will accept, I agree to the Amendment. If he will move it in this form—to leave out the words "shall on the constitution of" and insert "may by any scheme under this Act to constitute," I would accept it. Then in line 19 leave out the words "any any order or Act conferring any such right shall be construed accordingly,'' and insert "subject to the scheme providing for adequate representation on the joint electricity authority of the local authority from whom the right is transferred." I hope the noble Marquess will accept the suggestion.
§ On Question, Amendment, as amended, agreed to.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORThere are several consequential Amendments.
§
Amendments moved—
Page 9, lines 24 and 25, leave out ("transferred") and insert ("transferable").
Page 9, line 26, leave out ("divided") and insert ("divinable").
464
Page 9, line 31, leave out ("transferred") and insert ("transferable").
Page 10, line 7, leave out ("distributors") and insert ("undertakers").
Page 10, line 9, leave out ("distributors") and insert ("undertakers").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendments agreed to.
§ Clause 17:
§ Power of Board of Trade to construct interim works.
§ 17.—(1) It shall be lawful for the Board of Trade, after consultation with the Electricity Commissioners, at any time after an electricity district has been provisionally determined and before the establishment of a joint electricity authority for the district, and for two years after the establishment of any such authority, with the consent of such authority, to construct any generating station, main transmission line, or other works, and exercise any other powers which a joint electricity authority can or can be authorised to exercise under this Act, but nothing in this provision shall be construed as vesting in the Board of Trade any generating station or main transmission line which under this Act becomes vested in a joint electricity authority:
§ Provided that, where the Board of Trade propose to construct a generating station before the establishment of a joint electricity authority for any district, the Electricity Commissioners shall consult with the county councils, local authorities, and authorised undertakers any part of whose county, district, or area of supply is within the electricity district as provisionally determined as to the site of the proposed station.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved to leave out all the words from the word "Act" where it first appears in subsection (1) to "authority" at the end of the first paragraph. The noble and learned Lord said: These words go out consequent upon the omission of the provisions for the compulsory acquisition of generating stations.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 4, line 20, leave out from ("Act") to the end of line 24.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 21:
§ Wayleaves.
§ 21.—(1) A joint electricity authority or any authorised undertakers may place any electric line below ground across any land, and above ground across any land other than land covered by buildings or used as a garden or pleasure ground in cases where the placing of such lines above ground is otherwise lawful, and where any line has been so placed across any land the joint electricity authority or undertakers may enter on the land for the purpose of repairing or altering the line:
465§ Provided that before placing any such line across any land the joint. electricity authority or undertakers shall serve on the owner and occupier of the land notice of their intention, together with a description of the nature and position of the lines proposed to be so placed; and if, within twenty-one days after the service of the notice, the owner and occupier fail to give their consent or attach to their consent any terms or conditions or stipulations to which the joint electricity authority or the undertakers object, it shall not be lawful to place the line across that land without the consent of the Board of Trade; and the Board of Trade may, if after giving all parties concerned an opportunity of being heard they think it just, by order give their consent either unconditionally or subject to such terms, conditions, and stipulations as they think just: and in deciding whether to give or withhold their consent, or to impose any terms, conditions, or stipulations (including the carrying of any portion of the line underground) the Board shall, among other considerations, have regard to the effect, if any, on the amenities or value of the land of the placing of the line in the manner proposed.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORThe words which I propose to omit are now unnecessary.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 18, line 4, leave out ("by order").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE MARQUESS OF CREWE moved, at the end of subsection (1), to insert:—"Provided also that if any of the parties are aggrieved by any such terms, conditions, or stipulations, the matter in dispute shall be determined by arbitration."
§ The noble Marquess said: This is an Amendment of a certain degree of substance, but I hope the noble and learned Lord may not think it unreasonable. The point is that the Board of Trade, after hearing all parties, is by Order to decide whether to give or withhold its consent; and we desire at the end of the subsection to provide also that if any of the parties are aggrieved by any such terms, conditions, or stipulations, the matter in dispute shall be determined by arbitration—that is to say, an arbitrator will be appointed by the Board of Trade before whom the parties can go if the conditions on which wayleaves are granted appear to them to be too onerous. Wayleaves of this kind may, of course, affect property very seriously, and it is thought—certainly by the London County Council, and, I conceive, by other public authorities too—that it is not unreasonable in this case to follow the 466 precedent which already exists in the case of the Post Office. When under the Telegraph Acts the Postmaster-General exercises his power of demanding wayleaves, he has to submit to arbitration if those who are affected consider themselves prejudiced by his action, and it is not quite clear why the Board of Trade should be placed in a different position from the Postmaster-General in this regard. I have been trying to consider whether there is any difference between the two cases, and I confess I do not see any, and I do not think that the Department need resent being subject to this right of appeal which would be a consolation to a great many people in certain hard cases.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 18, line 11, at end insert the said proviso.—(The Marquess of Crewe.)
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI hope that the noble Marquess will not press his Amendment, and I think the arguments against it are really very strong. It is a proposal to override the decision of the Ministry of Transport. Now this decision can only be given after full inquiry, and he must have regard in the course of the Inquiry to amenities and to value. I know of no case, except the case of the Postmaster-General, to which the noble Marquess referred, in which the decision of a Minister can be upset by an arbitrator; and when the noble Marquess asks me why the Minister of Transport should be placed in a different position, and in a position of greater immunity than the Postmaster-General, the answer I think must be apparent. The Postmaster-General is the operator. Under the Electricity (Supply) Bill the decision is not that of the operators or of the Electricity Commissioners, but it is the decision of the Ministry of Transport, who is removed as far as possible from anybody who can be said to be even remotely interested. In the case of the Postmaster-General obviously it is a decision by a person who is most directly interested. With that exception I am not aware of any single case in which the decision of a Minister is made the subject of arbitration.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI should not like, of course, to press the noble and learned Lord on this point beyond a certain limit, because he has been so exceedingly accommodating with reference 467 to this Bill, but I confess that my feeling is with the noble Marquess who sits behind me, and I should urge upon the noble and learned Lord to consent to the Amendment. The argument of the noble and learned Lord is that after all the Minister of Transport is an impartial person with reference to these particular proceedings. He says that the Postmaster-General is not an impartial person because he is the authority which is going to operate the telegraph or the telephones, and therefore he is necessarily an interested party, but that the Ministry of Transport is above all these things, because it is going to be the act of the Commissioners or of persons holding under the authority of the Commissioners, and therefore the Minister of Transport may be relied upon to see that nothing which is in the least harsh, or at least unjust, is done. Is that really a very genuine argument?
I think all of us know that the Minister of Transport, or perhaps I should say the Ministry of Transport, so as not to be personal, is a very keen office, anxious to make a great show in the world—I do not say it in any disrespectful way—and to make a great deal of progress in all the matters committed to its charge. It is full of zeal, and nothing in the world is so dangerous as a zealous official, which the noble and learned Lord very well knows. It is very likely, especially in the early years of the administration of this Act, that the Ministry of Transport will desire to press things rather with a high hand, and the distinction which the noble and learned Lord drew between that Department and the Post Office cannot I think be shown to be one having any foundation in practice. The Minister of Transport will have a strong bias—I do not mean to say of course that he will be deliberately unfair—against private rights. Although he will do his best to be equitable, he will very likely, in many cases, say, "We must sweep these private rights aside in order to make progress, and I cannot be bothered in considering them too much." Under these circumstances I think that the noble Marquess has made out a case for some kind of arbitration. If the noble and learned Lord is not convinced, however, I should not like to press it.
§ VISCOUNT HALDANEI should like to point out that power is not given to the Board of Trade but to the general Electricity Authority or the authority of any 468 authorised undertaking. What happens is that the Minister of Transport is made the arbitrator. The principle of that I will not now discuss, but it is a thing that we have had to consider before. This House, sitting in a judicial capacity, has had to consider it. It is a new form of judicial tribunal that is set up, but whatever may be said against it, it is certain that it has great advantages. There is no more slow tribunal than an arbitration. It is often not very well constituted, it is expensive, and it is lengthy, and when you want to get on and you cannot make progress there is something to be said for making the arbitrator a Government Department. I am quite aware of what may be said against it, but I can see considerable advantages arise from it in practice, and speaking for myself I do not share the apprehension about it that my noble friend, the noble Marquess, gave expression to. So far as I am concerned I am content that it should be as it is, but I recognise that it is one of those matters in which there may well be a difference of opinion.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI am sorry that I find myself unable to accept the Amendment. I think that it would mark a very great departure from the established practice. The section deals with the conditions under which a line may be placed below ground or above ground, and also with the rights of the private owner to have a hearing if he wishes to protest. The clause says on page 18 that the Board of Trade may, if after giving all parties concerned an opportunity of being heard they think it just, give their consent, either unconditionally or subject to such terms, conditions and stipulations as they think just. There is also a statutory direction at the end of subsection (1) stating that the Board shall, among other considerations, have regard to the effect if any on the amenities or value of the land proposed to be taken. There could not be a plainer direction to any honest Minister that he is to see, as an arbitrator, that he must have regard to the effect if any upon the amenities or value of the land. I would remind the noble Marquess that this is not a singular case. There are thousands of cases in which the Board of Trade is given authority of this kind after holding an Inquiry, and of course they hold their Inquiry with a degree of formality and impartiality with which all of us must be 469 familiar. Many of us who are lawyers have appeared before these Board of Trade representatives in hundreds of Inquiries and we know that there is a routine and a judicial procedure of a high standard. No one knows better than the noble Marquess the immense weight of the public services and functions of the Board of Trade, reinforced as they have been in many cases by the splendid personnel of the Board, and I should expect them in this matter to adhere to the high traditions with which we have become familiar. I therefore very much hope that the noble Marquess will not press me to accept this Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORThe Amendment standing in my name to Clause 21, to leave out "shall" and insert "may," is purely drafting.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 21, line 31, leave out ("shall") and insert ("may").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 25:
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI have also an Amendment to Clause 25 which is drafting.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 23, line 14, after ("approved") insert ("either with or without modifications").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 31:
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI have two Amendments to Clause 31 which are drafting.
§
Amendments moved—
Page 25, line 10, after ("with") insert ("any authorised undertakers or any other authority, company, or person for any purpose")
Page 25, lines 27 and 28, leave out ("authority may be given").—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendments agreed to.
§ Clause 35:
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved, in Clause 35, to leave out the lines: "The expression 'dock generating station' means a station for generating electricity for use 470 solely or mainly by the owners of a dock undertaking for the purposes of the undertaking." The noble and learned Lord said: The lines as they appear are no longer necessary.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 28, leave out lines 1 to 4.—(The Lord Chancellor)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ Clause 37:
§ THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved to omit from Clause 37 paragraph (b): "(b) A reference to the Local Government (Application of Enactments) Order, 1898, shall be substituted for any reference to the Local Government Act, 1888." The noble and learned Lord said: This paragraph is now unnecessary. The only reference in the Bill to the matter there dealt with is in Clause 15, page 15, and the reference is made there merely for the purpose of fixing a date.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 29, lines 20 to 23, leave our paragraph (b).—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ On Question, Amendment agreed to.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI beg to move that this Bill be now read a third time.
§ Moved (Standing Order No. XXXIX having been suspended) That the Bill be now read 3a.—(The Lord Chancellor.)
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYI would like to ask the noble and learned Lord whether he thinks it is quite wise to take the Third Reading now. I heard with amazement his skill in weaving manuscript Amendments into the Bill as he went along.
§ THE LORD CHANCELLORI am quite prepared to take the Third Reading on Monday.
§ Motion, by leave, withdrawn.