HL Deb 19 December 1928 vol 72 cc694-710

Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.

THE EARL of PLYMOUTH

My Lords, the object of this Bill is to give statutory authority for the sale of the Pacific cable and West Indian cable undertakings managed at present by the Pacific Cable Board, and for the sale of the Transatlantic cables worked by the Postmaster-General. This is an essential part of the scheme for the reorganisation of the Imperial wireless and cable services which was proposed by the Imperial Conference of last July. This particular Bill deals only with those parts of the scheme which involve legislation in this country, but I think that I ought to give your Lordships a brief summary of the situation which gave rise to the Conference and an outline of the solution which it recommended.

Between October, 1926, and September, 1927, beam wireless services were opened between this country on the one hand and Canada, Australia, South Africa and India on the other. The rates of charge fixed for the beam services were very substantially below those in force for cable rates and under the terms of the agreement under which the stations were constructed by the Marconi Company the rates had to be such (and these are the exact words) as to "attract the largest possible volume of traffic with due regard to economic considerations." The immediate result was that, although the introduction of cheaper rates all round led to an appreciable increase in the total volume of telegraph traffic, the cable undertakings—including the Government undertakings—suffered a very large loss of revenue. It became perfectly clear that if unrestricted competition were allowed to operate, the cable services might be crushed and driven out of business; a situation might develop in which the cable companies would feel bound to liquidate their undertakings rather than waste their resources by continuing to run at a loss. I need hardly say that the Government were not prepared to contemplate a situation such as this arising. Although the beam wireless obviously has great advantages, it is only the cable that can give absolute certainty and secrecy. The consideration of these two things is of the utmost importance both from the commercial and from the Imperial point of view, and the Government felt that it was absolutely essential to carry on the cable undertakings in some form or another.

The problem therefore which the Conference had to face was how to preserve the cables while providing for the fullest expansion and development of the new beam services. Their conclusion, after considering the various alternatives, was that the only satisfactory solution lay in the amalgamation of all the wireless and cable interests concerned in a single undertaking which would secure unity of control and direction. The scheme proposed by the Conference has been criticised in certain quarters because this unity of control and direction has not been secured by means of Government ownership. But I would point out these facts. These wireless and cable services cover an area far wider than that of any single government. His Majesty's Government in Great Britain cannot operate wireless and cable plant in the Dominions and in India. Government ownership and control would have meant joint ownership and joint control which, with the best will in the world, could not have secured the same unity of direction as the scheme proposed by the Conference. Furthermore, I can tell your Lordships that the other Governments concerned in the Empire have definitely decided for some years past that they would not run the wireless services as a Government institution, and this to all intents and purposes really makes the proposal quite impracticable and impossible.

But I think I ought to draw your Lordships' attention to another aspect of the situation and it is this. While it is true that direct Government working in so far as the beam service is concerned is to be suspended, at the same time a much larger cable system and an equally large beam system will, if the proposed scheme is put into operation, come under a measure of Government control to which they have not been subjected hitherto. I will endeavour a little later on to explain what I mean to your Lordships. The scheme is designed to combine as far as possible the advantages of State control with the numerous advantages of private ownership.

The scheme recommended by the Conference is briefly as follows. A merger company will be formed to acquire all the capital of the Marconi Company and the ordinary capital of the cable companies, thus effecting a concentration of the control of these companies. These companies will retain their investment and manufacturing interests, which are not directly concerned with communication services. A separate company, which is to be called the Communications Company, will be formed on public utility lines to acquire all the assets and to conduct all the business of the companies concerned in the merger so far as relates to communications. It is this latter company which will take over the Government-owned services. It will acquire the two Imperial Transatlantic cables, the Pacific Cable Board's cables, and the West Indian cable and wireless system worked by the Pacific Cable Board, and will hold the lease of the Post Office beam wireless stations.

Now I come to the point I referred to a moment ago. The Communications Company will be subject to such Government control as is necessary to safeguard both the interests of the Empire Governments and of the users of the cable and wireless services. Not only will two of its directors (one being the Chairman) be persons approved by His Majesty's Government, but it will consult an Advisory Committee, which will include representatives of all the Governments concerned, on questions of policy. This Committee will have special powers in regard to the fixing of rates which will enable it to protect the interests of the users. No increase of existing rates can be made without the consent of the Committee. Moreover, a standard net revenue of£1,865,000 from communication services has been fixed as the sum which may be retained for the purposes of the company. If the net revenue exceeds that figure, 12 per cent. of the excess comes to the Government as additional payment for the lease of the beam, and of the balance one half is to be devoted to reduction of rates or such other purpose as the Advisory Committee may approve. I consider that this is substantial and effective control. British control over all the companies will be guaranteed, and the Governments will have the right to assume control of the cable and wireless systems in times of national emergency.

I turn now to the Bill itself. Clause 1 deals with the sale of the Pacific cable which is owned jointly by this country, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. This cable was opened in 1901 and for fourteen years there were constant deficits. From 1915 to 1927, mainly owing to War traffic, profits were earned which were largely devoted to duplicating the cable. In 1927–8 the beam wireless service between the British Isles and Australia entered into competition and the traffic receipts fell by£80,000. The cable can at present just earn the interest on its loan capital, but the competition of beam wireless would be only too likely to result in deficits in future. The Communications Company takes over the debt represented by the outstanding loan capital, now amounting to£1,233,000, and pays in addition a capital sum of£517,000, of which this Government will receive 5–18ths or about£1,14,000.

Clause 2 deals with the sale of the West Indian cable which is owned by Great Britain, Canada and certain West Indian Islands. This cable has been run at a loss ever since it was opened. It has a debt in respect of loan capital amounting to£379,000, and will be sold for£300,000. The purchase price will be applied in reduction of the outstanding debt. Clause 3 is not so important. It deals with the dissolution of the Pacific Cable Board at a date which will depend upon the date of completion of the transfer to the Communications Company of the undertakings now managed by the Board. Clause 4 deals with the sale of the Imperial Transatlantic cables owned by the Post Office. On these cables there has been a deficit in each year since 1921. After providing for depreciation and interest the average annual deficit for the years 1923 to 1926 was£37,627 and in the last completed year the loss of traffic owing to beam competition had the result of reducing operating revenue to a figure insufficient to cover depreciation, let alone interest. These cables will be sold for£450,000. Taking the three properties together, the partner Governments are relieved of a debt of£1,233,000 in respect of the Pacific cable, and receive in addition£1,267,000 in cash. This is quite apart from the sums we shall receive from the leasing of the beam wireless service. As the cables at present barely pay their way, and have a prospect of a growing loss resulting from increased competition from wireless and foreign interests, the Government are satisfied that we are receiving fair and adequate terms.

There is one other likely criticism I should like to deal with before I sit down. It will almost certainly be said that the Government is leasing the beam Service at a ridiculously low and inadequate figure. Let me explain the terms on which the beam service is to be leased. For the use of the beam service for 25 years—without the telephone service, that is—the Communications Company is to pay£60,000 down, a royalty of£250,000 a year and 12 per cent. of all profits made above the standard rate to which I have already referred—namely,£1,865,000 a year. On the other side the beam system cost only£240,000 to institute. Now, I will ask your Lordships what would be the attitude of the critics of this transaction if the position were reversed—that is, if the Government were leasing this system from a private company. I venture to say that their criticisms would be very severe. The position is that for what cost us£240,000 we are to receive£60,000 down,£250,000 a year and 12 per cent. of all profits above a certain standard rate which I have already mentioned. The Government are satisfied that this arrangement is a perfectly fair one and certainly not a disadvantageous one to the Government. I do not think there is anything else I ought to say to your Lordships in moving the Second Reading. I therefore beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time.

Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(The Earl of Plymouth.)

LORD PARMOOR, who had given Notice to move, as an Amendment, That the Bill he read 2a this day six months, said: My Lords, entirely agree with what the noble Earl has said in one respect, and although we shall have to differ oil many points I hope we shall do so in a friendly spirit. I entirely agree that what we are really dealing with this afternoon, and what makes the importance of our discussion this afternoon, is the Report of the Conference to which he has referred. Your Lordships may have noticed that in the Preamble of the Bill itself this Conference is referred to as "a Conference of representatives of the partner Governments and of certain other Governments of His Majesty's Dominions and Colonies," and its purpose is stated to have been "to examine the situation which had arisen as a result of the competition of the beam wireless with the cable services, to report thereon and to make recommendations…"The position is an exceptional one. I have known in my experience cases of this kind in which difficult questions such as arise here have had to be faced, but of course not under the same conditions. An illustration of that is the telephone arbitration and the award of fifteen or sixteen million pounds.

The first point I want to raise is this. The beam service only came into operation very partially in 1926—very partially indeed. In 1927 three other services were instituted, and even from that short experience, as the noble Earl has pointed out, it has turned out that the beam service is extremely profitable, so profitable that it makes competition from what are known as the cable services undoubtedly almost impossible. Therefore you have in the hands of the Government as profitable an undertaking as I suppose has ever been tried as an experiment, either as a national experiment or as a business experiment. On the other side—and a fusion is suggested between them—you have the cable companies who are practically likely to get into a bankrupt condition. The reason of that is very obvious, and it is in this respect that the matter has been discussed both in your Lordships' House on its judicial side and elsewhere. It means that the cable companies have a very large quantity of obsolete or obsolescent equipment which from a commercial standpoint ceases to have any value at all, whereas on the other side, when we come to the question of the beam system, we have, as the noble Earl pointed out, something which has proved extraordinarily profitable, not only profitable in the sense of making a profit but in the sense of diminishing the cost—a very important matter—of Imperial wireless communications between the Mother Country and her various Colonies.

But that is only a very small part of the position. I think myself it is midsummer madness, if I may say so, to attempt at this stage in any way to ascertain what is the value of the beam system to the nation and the Government. I will give an illustration. I happen to have knowledge of these patents from the commencement. That was in my old professional days. But no one can possibly tell at this stage what the development may be of the beam services, either as regards the number of words sent or as regards the profit attached to the business. But this very day, to emphasize my view that anything of this kind is altogether premature at the present time, we have an account of beam wireless development. We know that experiments have been going on for a long time between Canada and this country through Marconi experts, who of course are the experts who are thoroughly cognisant of knowledge of this kind. It is stated in The Times to-day in regard to the latest development of beam wireless that—— It would make all beam stations, he [an official of the Marconi Company] said, capable of dealing with three times their present traffic. Just think what that means—three times the present traffic with no additional expense for equipment. Therefore you have here a new system which is only experimental, which was instituted first in 1926, since when only three experimental systems have been instituted, and now in 1928 you have this development. These new experiments show that when the results of the experiments are put into operation all beam stations will be capable of dealing with three times their present traffic, and the report in The Times to which I am referring goes on to say:— and would probably lead to the fixing of very reasonable rates for beam wireless in the near future. I admit that personally, as regards an Imperial matter, I agree that reasonableness of rates for communications is more important than the question of the money involved.

But let us look at it from another point of view. Why should the proposal be made that our Government should part with a property of this kind at this moment? I will deal a little later with the terms to which the noble Earl re- ferred. No one knows what the future advantages may be. No one knows that the property may not be multiplied in value tenfold or even hundredfold, after a preliminary experience and experiment that has gone on only to a very limited extent. We are asked to sanction a Bill which alienates for 25 years all possible additional results from the beam system or to reduce the charges to an almost nominal sum compared with the old charges for inter-communication by electricity between the Mother Country and the various Dominions. I put it to any commercial person here—I see Lord Hunsdon of Hunsdon present—whether it is not of the utmost importance that this Imperial communication should be as cheap as possible. That is at the very bottom of our commercial and Imperial position. What is the result of this transfer? It is taking away the ownership of this property from the country and the Government and transferring it to commercial undertakings which at the present time are really in an almost bankrupt condition. I will not, for the moment, deal with the question of terms, but I must deal with them before I finish what I have to say to your Lordships.

I am not exaggerating. Let me very shortly refer your Lordships to one or two passages in the Report to which the noble Earl has referred. It states in the first place that in Great Britain beam stations are owned and operated by the Government. That is as it should be, but the noble Earl suggested that the Dominions or portions of them may have a different view regarding the ownership and operation of the beam system. No doubt the Dominions can do as they like and will do as they like. But their results have not come from a fusion which, to my mind, would be nothing but a disaster: they have come from the operation of the beans services in their initial stage, and if I might instance Canada, which is a very important Dominion, she has, no doubt, leased the operation of the beam services, but she has done it by a licence from year to year, which she has reserved the right to cancel at any time without notice, and the terms of payment are subject to a system, which we have not here, of Court control. The matter is under the same Court as controls railway rates. It is not a mere advisory committee, but a judicial body upon which, in a matter of this kind, I think reliance may be placed.

Let me read from the Report: Before the opening of the beam service"— that was but a year ago, and only on a very limited scale— the cables were working with a large margin of animal surplus. I think that is quite true. What has Peen the effect of their opening?— It has been represented to us that the cable undertakings affected by the wireless rate reductions and the Indo-European land-line service have Men brought to a serious position. I assume that to be true. I do not know who made these communications, but it was probably the representatives of the companies concerned. I always thought that one of the benefits of what we call private enterprise is that, when you become a victim of competition, the loss falls upon the company or persons concerned and is not in the nature of a public or national loss. It appears to me that if this principle is to be introduced and we are to subscribe from our national resources and give up our national advantages in a matter of this kind because the equipment of certain cable companies is either obsolete or obsolescent, we cut at the very foundation of all that has been so often said in this House with regard to private enterprise.

Let me go a little further, for some of these terms are very striking. I have referred to the effect on the companies. The Report says: On the other hand, the present beam rates on the Australian, South African and Indian services—assuming the existing traffic"— which is the result of one year's working— to be maintained or the increase to be continued—yield a very high profit. I do not think that we have the figures of that profit, but the noble Earl indicated something like 100 per cent. He said that from an expenditure of£240,000 we were getting£250,000 a year, or something of that kind.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

That is what we should gat under the proposed new scheme.

LORD PARMOOR

I thought that was what you were getting at present.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I do not think so.

LORD PARMOOR

I will deal with that point. I do not want to exaggerate at all, but really the history of this matter is a very curious one throughout. I make no suggestions with regard to personal interests, nor would I dream of doing so. I am merely dealing with it as a matter of business and trying to estimate what it means. A very high profit was made on a business that has been in operation for hardly a year. The Report goes on to say:— And these rates could be substantially reduced and still give a handsome return on the capital invested in the beam undertaking. Here are two considerations which I should have thought would have recommended on the strongest grounds that an undertaking of this kind should be a national undertaking. You have an extremely hopeful outlook on the one hand, and on the other hand you can reduce charges drastically, as I understand, in order to have a cheap method of communication throughout the Empire. What are the objections to the present system? There are certainly none to be found in this Report. All that we find in this Report are assumptions of benefits to result from the change, although no facts are published of any sort or kind. I must say that it appears to me a most monstrous proposal that, after a very limited period of experiment and experience, you should, under certain conditions—I will refer to the terms in a moment—alienate a great national property and give up a great source of cheap Imperial intercommunication.

The next point to which the noble Earl referred concerned the terms on which this transaction is going to be undertaken. Let us see what the terms are. I must admit, as I think everyone would, that, so far as the Report of the Conference is concerned, there is no evidence on which any sound opinion could be formed. There is not a syllable of evidence, but only assumptions and inferences which the members of the Conference have themselves drawn. The noble Earl spoke of a sum of£250,000 per annum. I understood that that was the£250,000 per annum now being derived from the beam system. Am I wrong in that?

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I am afraid I do not follow the noble and learned Lord.

LORD PARMOOR

I was dealing with the terms. The first of them is the basic sum of£250,000 per annum. Is that the profit or income which is now being derived from the beam system, owned and operated in this country? I understood it was, but if no one knows where that sum comes from it is a bolt from the blue. It might be a fair sum, or it might be a totally inadequate sum. I cannot go beyond that. I did think that there was one firm basis—namely, the£250,000, that was settled having regard to the profits being made at the present time. If that is not so it might just as well be£20,000 or£2,000,000. The second point is the additional 12 per cent. They are getting cent, per cent, at the present time, and as regards this 12 per cent. being taken——

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

Those are the profits of the Communications Company.

LORD PARMOOR

There is no Communications Company at the present time. The Communications Company is a thing of the future.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

This is the proposed scheme.

LORD PARMOOR

The proposal is that we are to pass over this extraordinarily profitable undertaking, which is in its infancy, and to get a basic sum of£250,000 per annum. How is that sum arrived at? Unless we know that, no business man in this House would give the smallest weight to that sum. I did think that there was some basis for it, but, having regard to what the noble Earl says now, there is no basis for it. Then in certain circumstances there may be an additional 12 per cent. That is no protection whatever. After the 12 per cent. has been taken, in favour of our Government and our national assets, of the remaining or next 100 per cent., 50 per cent. goes wholly to the purposes of the company, and the other 50 per cent. is controlled by the Advisory Committee. What the value of that is I am coming to presently. Assuming, therefore, that you get 100 per cent.—which after all would be a small profit, if the beam wireless system carries out the prospects which everyone is anticipating at present—we do not get any advantage from that. All we get is a sum fixed no one knows how, and the maximum margin is only 12 per cent., in addition, of the earnings of the company. I think any prophecy of this kind is absurd in attempting to adjust figures for a national payment. You have not got the statistics, and you ought to have waited several years before attempting to estimate this national asset. There is also a payment of£60,000, which seems, to be a sort of backsheesh.

I now come to the next point to which the noble Earl referred, and that is the Imperial Advisory Committee. What is the benefit of an Imperial Advisory Committee in a matter of this kind? It has been a system unfortunately very largely introduced into our governmental processes, in order to shunt responsibility from members and Ministers, who ought themselves to make a determination and to justify that determination, whatever it may be, either in this House or in the other House. This Imperial Advisory Committee, which has to deal with the other 50 per cent. of surplus profits, may deal with that money in any way they like, and amongst other purposes for the reduction of the charges. Is it in the least likely that an Advisory Committee of that kind will have anything like effective control? There is one point on which I am entirely in agreement with some noble Lords on the other side. If you are going to have private enterprise, and company enterprise, let us formulate it on a sound basis and then let it have liberty to operate in the way that it thinks most effective. Of all methods the method proposed here is the worst—nominally to hand over this undertaking to private enterprise, and then to hamper it with an Advisory Committee.

I look upon an Advisory Committee of that sort as perfectly useless. I think it was Mr. Parnell who said, with regard to the appointment of an Advisory Committee, that it did not matter what the powers were but it all depended upon the appointees, and this Advisory Committee is likely to have no effect what- ever when this fusion business gets into the hands of these large amalgamated companies. Two of the directors have to be approved by the Government. What protection is that? I would like to ask the noble Earl, if you are dealing with a big combine such as we have at the present time, what the effect is likely to be of the fact that the Government have assented to A. and B. being Chairman and Vice-Chairman. They are chosen and selected by the company itself, and it is only a question of the Government's approval. There, again, if you are going to hand over great undertakings of this kind to private hands, I am one who considers that they should be handed over in the spirit of trust and confidence and without undue and petty interference of this kind.

The underlying principle here is a very big one. Is it justifiable at this stage to hand over a great national asset of this kind, with the possibilities which are known to exist? Only to-day we have had declarations of an invention which gives three times the power to the existing equipment of the beam company in this country. That is to say, although the company has been enormously prosperous and profitable up to now, without any great additional expenditure you may in the future get three times the revenue as compared with that which you are now deriving. Whether you use it in dividends or in the far better system of reducing the cost of intercommunication between the Mother Country and our Dominions, is a matter which this country, this Government and our own Ministers, ought to decide from time to time as and when the occasion arises.

I do not know, my Lords, that there is any other point upon which I particularly desire to trouble you this afternoon, but I want to emphasise this, and perhaps I have had a rather large experience in this respect. On the one hand, can any one justly estimate the value to this country of the beam wireless system after an experience of very little more than a year? As a business proposition, is that possible? Would any one in these conditions buy up what is in itself a new invention, a new method, on a basis of that knd, and more particularly when it is an invention in which from time to time new progress is being made? I do not believe that any one would entertain that for a single moment as a business proposition. Now, look at the other side. How are you to value obsolete and obsolescent machinery? It may be that it is not altogether obsolete or obsolescent, though it certainly will be in a very short period of time. Whenever you have to consider what the value of an undertaking is you absurdly exaggerate the figure unless you make a large deduction in respect of machinery which has become obsolete or obsolescent. I recollect that not long before the end of my professional life I had to argue in this House a case concerning the value of obsolete or obsolescent machinery. Mr. Alfred Lyttelton was the arbitrator, and this Court unanimously decided that if it was obsolete or obsolescent it was worth nothing; therefore the suggested damages for the non-delivery of machinery of that kind ought to be assessed at nothing. As far as I can see, if what is stated in this Conference Report is true, that is exactly the position of these cable companies.

The noble Earl did raise one point. He said it was well that these cable companies should be preserved for certain purposes, or rather that the cable communication should be preserved. It is not suggested that these various cables should not be maintained. Let that be so. It is a matter for the particular district which wants immediate communication to make its own arrangements and adjustments. There is not the slightest reason why the beam company cannot be supported and used, and flourish, and at the same time these other companies carry out any subsidiary duties which are thought desirable.

I am sorry to have been so long but it is an extraordinarily difficult case, and very complicated. In the Report of the Conference we are told that at a certain date, March 14, 1928, a letter was received from the chairman of the Eastern Associated Cables Company and the Marconi Wireless Telegraph Company, of which Lord Inverforth is chairman, saying that in certain circumstances they were willing to have a merger fusion. I do not know how that letter came to be written, but it was written. There is not one word in it about the beam system. And then later (I am quoting again from the Report) it is said:— It is possible"— I do not know who foretold this possibility; we have none of the evidence— that unless the beam installations were transferred to the new company the merger would not, in fact, take place. What does that mean, and what right had they to base the merger on the beam system being brought into the general consideration? Not a word of it before! We are told the merger is going on, and they suddenly say it will not be possible unless, as part of the merger, we bring in the beam wireless system.

I think that this is really an outrage on the ordinary principles of dealing with property, both as regards the price obtained, seeing that the Government have no evidence whatever as to the right figure, and as regards the payment or consideration given by the merger companies, of which we know nothing. I do not believe for one moment it would have been sanctioned or considered but for those who dislike profitable undertakings of this kind being left in national hands, for national benefit, to be worked from a public point of view as the major and governing consideration. I do not know how often we have heard about the advantages of cheap Imperial inter-communication. We obtained that chance through our ownership and operation of the beam system, and now I suggest that we are throwing it away without any due consideration and without a single figure in this Report which justifies the bargain that has been made. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Leave out ("now"), and at the end of the Motion insert ("this day six months").—(Lord Parmoor.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

My Lords. I am very grateful to the noble and learned Lord for the spirit in which he has criticised this Bill, but he really has been dealing with matters of which I spoke in the short speech which I made in introducing the Bill, and I do not think there is very much for me to answer. I think the burden of the noble and learned Lord's charge is that we ought not to have rushed into this question, that the beam service was in its infancy, and we were not in a position to know what it was worth to the country. Well, I should like to ask the noble and learned Lord whether he would have been prepared to allow the situation to go on as it is at the present moment.

LORD PARMOOR

What I said was that you have got a most interesting and valuable experiment, which ought to be worked out. I think there is no doubt of it.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

In that case it would have meant that the cable companies would almost certainly have been crushed out of existence.

LORD PARMOOR

Why not?

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I told the noble and learned Lord in my earlier speech that the Government have come to the conclusion that it is absolutely essential that these cable services should be carried on, because they did ensure certain things which a wireless service could not, ensure, namely, certainty and secrecy, which are of the utmost importance, both from the commercial and the Imperial point of view. After all, it is perfectly clear that in any arrangement of this kind the beam service was an essential part. If we desired to keep these cable services going, and yet to come to an arrangement into which all the various interests were brought, it was absolutely obvious that the beam service would have to be included. The noble and learned Lord—as I did too, I admit—dealt at considerable length with the terms on which the beam service was to be leased to the new Communications Company. He criticised the figure of£250,000, the yearly royalty which the Government are to receive, on two grounds—first, that it was based on an unknown factor, and alternatively that we had been deriving about that sum of money during the last year as a profit from that service. Well, I am led to understand that, as a matter of fact, we did not derive a sum anything like£250,000 during the past year's working.

LORD PARMOOR

Have you the figure?

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I have not the exact figure, but I will make it my business to find out, and let the noble and learned Lord know, if he so desires. This sum of£250,000 was arrived at after very full consideration, and with the best possible advice which could be got. I should like to point out that this question of the terms on which the beam service is to be leased to the Communications Company does not really come into the Bill at all, and the House will no doubt have an opportunity of criticising it when it arises later on. I would only like, in conclusion, to repeat that, as the Government have come to the conclusion, as the result of the findings of the Imperial Conference, that some kind of arrangement has to be come to, I consider that the Government have come to a very fair and not at all disadvantageous arrangement from their own point of view.

On Question, Amendment disagreed to: Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the whole House.