HL Deb 10 May 1928 vol 70 cc1081-93

Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.

LORD DESBOROUOGH

My Lords, I beg to move the Second Reading of this Bill. This Bill has become necessary because the time has arrived when the various Acts dealing with petroleum should be consolidated. A Consolidation Bill has been prepared and will in due course be submitted to your Lordships. The main Act relating to petroleum is obsolete and in many cases very difficult of interpretation. Therefore the Government thought it best to amend the existing Acts and then to pass a consolidation measure. The first Act dealing with petroleum was that, of 1871, and this was modified by the Locomotives on Highways Act, 1896, and further by the Petroleum Act, 1926. After the necessary amendments have been introduced into the various Acts it is proposed to consolidate them for the convenience of the public and the better administration of the law. I do not think that it is necessary for me to go into the various small amendments, important as they are, that are made by the various clauses of this Bill. Clause 1, for instance, refers to harbours, which is rather a complicated matter and difficult of interpretation, and I do not think that I need weary your Lordships by going into details.

The two clauses of the Bill which will probably be most interesting to the House on the second Reading are Clauses 4 and 5. Clause 4 in effect deals with tetra-ethyl, a subject upon which your Lordships have already expressed some opinions, and Clause 5 deals with the unsightly nature of many of the filling stations that now adorn the country. Your Lordships are aware that my noble friend Lord Buckmaster introduced the matter of tetra-ethyl to the House and a Committee has been set up to inquire into the whole subject. It is impossible for me in any way to forestall the findings of that Committee, but it must be obvious to your Lordships that it is necessary to take some immediate steps so as to enforce if necessary those findings in a matter which may be of importance to the health of our people.

Accordingly, the Secretary of State, under this Bill, if he is— satisfied that any class of petroleum-spirit is, by reason of the nature thereof or of any substance mixed therewith, likely to be dangerous or injurious to health either generally or in the case of any class of persons,— that would be those who are bound to use it, such as the employees of garages— … may make such Regulations as appear to him to be reasonably practicable and to meet the necessity of the case … The Bill goes on to provide for the issue of Regulations— for the protection of persons employed or engaged in handling or using petroleum-spirit of that class in connection with any trade or business. That is a precautionary measure. The following subsection requires— persons selling to the public petroleum-spirit of that class to give … warning to purchasers … as to the dangers thereof and the precautions to be observed with respect thereto. The Minister further takes powers to prohibit absolutely the sale or use of petroleum-spirit which he may by order declare to be so dangerous or injurious to health … and so on. Powers are also taken for publication of the Regulations and for the enforcement of any penalties to which people may become liable under the Bill, the penalties ranging from a fine not exceeding £20 a day to various smaller penalties. That is the clause which deals with tetra-ethyl. I am sorry that my noble and learned friend Lord Buck-master is not in his place as I should have liked to have his comments on the proposals of the Government under this head.

The next point to which I might on Second Reading draw the attention of your Lordships concerns the filling stations and the very unsightly pumps to which your attention has been drawn. A rather difficult question arises as to who shall be the adjudicator in this æsthetic matter. There is a very widespread feeling throughout the country that some steps should be taken immediately to deal with an evil that is growing and that is very offensive to a large number of His Majesty's subjects. The countryside is at present disfigured not only by these pumps, but also by advertisements used in connection with the pumps, and under the heading "pumps" these advertisements are included. Certain county councils have already made representations to the Government, and perhaps your Lordships will allow me to read an extract from a letter from the Surrey County Council which, I think, sets out clearly the feeling of a great many councils on this matter.

It is as follows: The council, in view of the regrettably rapid increase in the number of petrol and oil supply stations throughout the country, are strongly of opinion that their efforts to preserve the beauty of the countryside will be nullified to a large extent unless some action is taken to regulate the design and elevation of such stations. In their opinion the majority of these stations, with their multi-coloured petrol pumps and oil tanks, are quite as disfiguring as many of the advertisements hoardings that have been condemned. On the other hand, the council have observed certain supply stations within the County area where all the apparatus is painted in one uniform tint, either grey or white, with the result that such stations are by no means as unsightly as those referred to above. The object of this letter would certainly command a good deal of public support, but the difficulty that now arises is as to the most practical way of attaining it. The suggestion has been made that the matter should be dealt with by Regulations in regard to the location of these pumps and their design and elevation, and that such Regulations should be made by the Secretary of State or by the Minister of Health. There are obviously a good many objections to both of those suggestions. It will be very difficult to do anything effective in a matter of this kind from Whitehall. Indeed, after the remarks made by the Lord Chancellor at the Academy dinner the other day, my confidence in the æsthetic powers of Whitehall has been very much diminished. Regulations could, of course, be made as to colour and screening and one or two other points, but it would be very difficult for the Government to draw up any general Regulations dealing with all these pumps, and they have no staff of officials for carrying them out.

The alternative seems rather to be that some local authority should be given powers to deal with this matter and to take into consideration the conditions of the locality and also the convenience of the public. Accordingly the Government, after having considered this matter carefully and having considered also the debates in another place, have come to the conclusion that the most suitable authority to deal with this matter would be the county and borough councils. These are the authorities for making by-laws for the good order of their localities and it is proposed to give them specific powers to make by-laws on the subject. Clause 5, to which I have referred, has been drawn with this object in view. It is proposed to give county and borough councils powers to regulate the design and appearance of petroleum filling stations in their area and also to exclude them, subject to certain conditions set out in proviso (ii)—namely, they must have regard to the need for reasonable facilities for the supply of petroleum in or near the part of their area to which the by-laws apply. And it is possible that a committee should be appointed to consider the whole subject and see what could best be done to meet the necessities of the situation.

The provisos in subsection 1 are somewhat important. It would be a convenience if some authority could make suggestions as to some sort of standard pump. It would be a great convenience to the makers and suppliers of pumps, and different requirements could be laid down by local authorities for different areas. This is effected by the first proviso. It may be noticed in this connection that "filling stations" are defined to include advertisements displayed at such stations. This is a matter which calls for attention at the earliest possible moment before further mischief is done. While this matter was being considered in another place a deputation was received from the urban district councils and, several letters have also been received on this matter. They claimed, and claimed I think with justice, that, their local interest being so great, they should have some voice in this matter and that the power to make these by-laws should also, be extended to them. This point is really, I suppose, a Committee point, but so far as the Government are concerned they are very anxious to meet as far as possible the urban district councils and in Committee it is proposed to introduce an Amendment which I hope will go some way to meet the requirements of these bodies. It was urged that the Government should take immediate steps to remove objectionable pumps. This, again, is a Committee point, and I am prepared on behalf of the Government to give this matter the fullest consideration before the Committee stage.

Those are the principal matters of interest in the Bill, though the rest of it is also very important. There is one matter which I may mention, covered by Clause 6, which relates to canals. Your Lordships may be aware that there has been certainly one very bad accident on a canal attended unfortunately with fatal results, and it is proposed in this Bill to give canal companies power to make by-laws for the purpose of safeguarding the public when petroleum is being carried on canals. I beg to move.

Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a.—(Lord Desborough.)

LORD ARNOLD

My Lords, I propose to confine my remarks on this Bill to matters arising out of Clause 5. That clause deals with petroleum filling stations or, as they are perhaps more shortly termed, petrol pumps. I think there will be general agreement with the object aimed at, which is to prevent the disfigurement of the country side and places of beauty or of historic interest by petrol pumps. But a position of some importance arose in regard to this matter, and I should like to make a statement about it, for I think it is desirable that the whole of the facts should be on record. It will be necessary for me to make some reference to happenings in another place, but I am not unmindful of the objection in your Lordships' House to that being done to any large degree, and I trust I shall not transgress. I merely wish to make the position plain.

When the Bill was first introduced there was no provision in it at all for dealing with petrol pumps, but on the Second Reading in another place it was suggested that this was a good opportunity to do something in that regard, and accordingly, at a somewhat late stage, the rather unusual course was taken of moving an Instruction to the Committee, asking them to insert a clause empowering local authorities to make by-laws with regard to petrol pumps in their areas. There is no objection to that. I think we are all in agreement about the object aimed at. But unfortunately, whereas this Instruction was moved on a Monday, a new clause was moved the next morning and was inserted by the Committee before 12 o'clock. There was practically no opportunity for the urban district councils, which are very seriously affected by the present form of the clause, to make any representations and, owing to certain rules of order, when the matter came up later in another place it was held that, this having been inserted under an Instruction, no further Amendment could be made. Under Clause 5 however, as inserted by the Committee, the term "local authority" is confined either to a county council or a borough it does not include an urban district council. It is true that under this clause Regulations made by a county council will apply to the whole area and, provided Regulations are made, will include the urban district councils in that area. But that is not, I think, by any means entirely satisfactory, and I shall have something to say about the operation of that in a moment or two.

In the meanwhile the point I want to stress is that it is a very anomalous thing to give these powers for making by-laws with regard to petrol pumps to county councils and borough councils and not to urban district councils, because some of the boroughs are very small indeed. I will give two or three examples. You have in Glamorganshire the Borough Council of Cowbridge with a population of 1,147, but in that County you have the urban district of Rhondda with a population of 167,900. Cowbridge under this clause can make by-laws with regard to petrol pumps, Rhondda cannot do so. Take Kent. In Kent, New Romsey is a borough with a population of 1,605, but in Kent there is a very important urban district of Beckenham, an extremely favoured residential district, with a population of 33,500, but that urban district cannot make Regulations. Take Essex. Saffron Walden is a small borough with a population of 5,876. Walthamstow, an urban district in Essex, has a population of 127,000. As a matter of fact, altogether there are 106 non-county boroughs with populations of fewer than 10,000 people, and 65 of them have populations under 5,000 On the other hand there are no fewer than 261 urban districts with populations of more than 10,000. It therefore does seem a very strange differentiation to make between these various kinds of local authorities, and that, I think, is all the more true because in matters of town planning, streets and buildings, and so forth, the urban district council is the local authority for dealing with such matters. I would submit that this question of petrol pumps is very analogous to matters of that kind, and indeed it has been held that a petrol pump is an erection under a certain section of the Housing and Town Planning Acts. Therefore I think it very difficult for the Government to defend this differentiation.

Consider also this point. The members of urban district councils obviously have much more local knowledge and local interest than the members of the county council. Further, only one county councillor at the most will live in au urban district, whereas the members of the urban district council, I suppose, all live there, all have special interests in its amenities, and all would watch everything much more closely than would be possible for county council officials, and certainly possible for county council members. It has been suggested, I know, that this differentiation should be made because certain small boroughs have features of beauty and of historical interest and therefore should have these powers to defend these places. If that argument is going to be used in the case of borough councils, it can be employed also with regard to urban district councils. Eton is a place well known to many of your Lordships. Eton has an urban district council. Then such places as Lynton, Ilfracombe and Windermere, all have urban district councils, and therefore there is nothing in this differentiation, if it is to be alleged that these powers should be given for the purpose of preserving places of beauty or historical interest.

I could understand it if it had been said that in order not to have too many authorities the powers should not be given to any councils with a population below, say, 10,000. That would be an intelligible proceeding, but the differentiation in the Bill is not, I think, based upon any scientific or defensible principle. It will be said, I know, that you must, if possible, have uniformity; that between London and Brighton, for example, there are only two county councils, whereas there are a number of urban district councils, and so you might have many different kinds of by-laws relating to this matter; but that contention cannot be sustained because these by-laws, it is to be presumed, will be made upon the plan of model by-laws supplied from the Home Office, and under Clause 5 subsection (3) the Secretary of State has power to disapprove of by-laws if he does not like them, and therefore has absolute control in his own hands. Therefore, I do not think any argument of substance can be made with regard to this question of lack of uniformity or variety. Uniformity could, and would, be obtained even if the urban district councils had this power.

May I put a point which I think is one of some substance? I notice that there have been certain measures introduced by the Government which have not been helpful to the minor local authorities. The urban district councils have, on the whole, proved themselves to be useful and well-working bodies, though there is very little inducement to serve upon them. The prestige is not high, the pay is nothing, the work is very hard, in many cases involving, as some of your Lordships may know, late sittings night after night, and I suggest that it is not very encouraging to persons of standing to come forward and sit upon these urban district councils if their powers are to be limited in a matter like this. The power to make Regulations is taken away from them, and yet it is given to a borough which may be only one-fiftieth of the size of an urban district in the same county. I think there is a strong case in a matter like this for considering very sympathetically the claims of the urban district councils.

In fact, the Home Secretary, I think, was greatly impressed by the case which I have been venturing to adumbrate, and he said he would consider the matter. He has considered the matter and is prepared to go, in the course of the Committee stage, a certain distance to meet the point, although not so far as we who take the opposite view would like him to go. He is going to insert an Amendment, as I understand it, not to include urban district councils as the authority, but to enact that any urban district council shall have power to enforce the by-laws within its district, if made by the county council, and any expense incurred in the matter is to be defrayed as part of the general expenses. I should like to thank the Government for their intention, so far as it goes, but I should have been glad if they could have gone a little further and included urban district councils as the authorities for making these Regulations.

As a matter of fact, this is the first time that there has been differentiation, in any Act of Parliament, between an urban district council and a borough since, I think, 1907, except in the case of the Shop Hours Act of 1912, which was in a somewhat special category—it was really a consolidating Act, continuing old legislation and not enacting new legislation. Not only is that so, but in the principal Act of 1871 it is laid down that urban district councils, as well as borough councils, are to be the local authorities, and I think that makes it all the more extraordinary that in this further Bill you should make this entirely exceptional differentiation under Clause 5.

My final point is this. I have explained that if a county council makes by-laws they will apply to the district councils in that area; but what is going to happen if the county council does not make by-laws? There is nothing in this clause to compel the county council to make by-laws, and there is no power, so far as I know, to compel them to do so. This point has been submitted to the Government, and the Home Secretary, I understand, has stated that if he receives an intimation from any district council that the county council have failed to make bylaws, and the district council urgently desires that they should be made, he will at once take up the matter with the county council, and though he has not power to compel them to make by-laws, he has every reason to believe that the matter would be considered favourably by most county councils. I was hoping that that statement would be made by the noble Lord on the Second Reading, because that seemed to be an appropriate occasion for doing so. He has not made that statement, and therefore I draw attention to the fact and put on record what I understand the Home Secretary has undertaken to do.

There is, however, a gap, because, although I hope that this expectation on the part of the Home Secretary will prove to be well-based, there may be county councils who for some reason or other do not make by-laws, and then the position will be unsatisfactory. If that happens in any number of cases I think something will have to be done, and further legislation probably will be required to deal with the situation. What I want to make clear is this, that so far as the urban district councils are concerned the view is taken very strongly that this Bill must not be allowed to establish a precedent, so as to break through what has been the rule ever since 1907. It is very strongly urged that the Bill should not be taken as a precedent in any way to the detriment of the urban district councils, and in order that this position might be fully safeguarded I could have strongly wished that the Government had put the urban district councils into Clause 5.

There is only one other point which occurred to me when looking through the Bill shortly before I rose. I should like to put the point, and perhaps the noble Lord will consider it. The words of Clause 5 are these: For the purpose of preserving the amenities of any rural scenery or place of beauty or historic interest for the enjoyment of the public, the council of any county or borough may make by-laws— and so forth. Looking closely at those words they seem to confine the operations of this Bill to the amenities of rural scenery or places of beauty or of historic interest. That would seem, if I read it aright, to rule out from the operation of the Bill a borough which may have some very good districts and may be wishful to prevent disfigurement but which cannot plead, of course, that it has rural scenery, because obviously it has not. At any rate, generally speaking, that plea could not be advanced, and also it might not have what would be called a place of beauty nor one of historic interest.

If that is the interpretation of this clause, does this Bill mean that a council could not make by-laws? Take, for instance, Bromley, which is near to Beckenham and, I believe, in many ways is very similar to it. Does it mean that Bromley could not make by-laws because it might be difficult to bring the particular situation there within the ambit of the clause? I would ask the noble Lord if he would be good enough to look into that matter between now and the Committee stage, because it happens from time to time, as your Lordships are aware, that a Bill is passed and then subsequently it is found that a little loophole has been left which was not noticed at the time of its passage. I do not wish to be dogmatic upon this particular point which only occurred to me a few moments ago; but it seems to me that the clause is not sufficiently comprehensive, and that the Government might possibly see their way to introduce an Amendment which would make the matter clear. I do not desire to trespass further upon your Lordships' time in making this statement, if I may so call it, but I wanted to place before your Lordships the view that this Bill should not in any way be regarded as a precedent to the detriment of urban district councils.

LORD MONTAGU OF BEAULIEU

My Lords, I have no desire to oppose this Bill, but I would like to say that unless I am satisfied that the right of appeal for those who have existing stations is safeguarded I shall be inclined to put down an. Amendment on the point. I understand that an appeal to the Home Secretary does exist. I have found the present stations very useful. A large number of them are run by ex-Service men who have put into them all that they have in the world. I am sure that your Lordships' House does not wish to do them any injustice. As I say, I do not wish to oppose the Bill; indeed, with many of its provisions I am entirely in accord.

LORD HUNSDON OF HUNSDON

My Lords, I should like in regard to Clause 5 to call attention to the fact, as the noble Lord opposite has done, that it is permissive. I rather hope that the Government may see their way to give some power to the Minister of Health to see that it is carried out. There are two Acts which deal with advertisements and which are very analogous to the present Bill. The first of them gives power to the local authority to make by-laws with regard to restricting advertisements and the second Act, which was passed in 1925 I believe, gives increased powers. A substantial number of county councils have not availed themselves of the second Act, and a quite substantial number have not availed themselves of either Act, and I rather fear that may be the case with this Bill if it becomes law.

LORD DESBOROUGH

My Lords, with regard to the remarks of my noble friend opposite respecting the urban district councils, I think I can say in justice to the Home Secretary that he is very much impressed with the case put forward while the Bill was under discussion in another place. In moving the Second Reading of the Bill I did not wish to go into any details or to discuss Amendments which had not been moved; but I did undertake that when the Bill came into Committee an Amendment would be moved, and I hope that we shall have the assistance of my noble friend opposite and of other noble Lords in discussing that Amendment. As to the suggestion made by my noble friend behind me, if any local authority wishes to put the power into operation two years must be allowed and, if there is to be power to remove existing stations, the question of compensation would then have to be thoroughly gone into. In regard to painting the pumps white instead of yellow, I do not know that personally I should feel much more inclined to get oil from it on that account.

On Question, Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House.