§ Order of the day for receiving the Report of Amendments read.
§ Moved, That the Report be now rereceived.—(The Marquess of Londonderry).
EARL RUSSELLMy Lords, on the Second Reading of this Bill I suggested to the noble Marquess that I might possibly desire to put down some Amendments and he was good enough to give ample time before the Committee stage. The Amendment that I should have specially desired to put down would have been one to the effect that railway companies might be ordered to give facilities for new roads by Order of the Ministry of Transport for new bridges to be built over their lines. That would have been a highly controversial Amendment, and I have ascertained by inquiry that this is practically an agreed Bill. I therefore put no Amendment down. I do not want in any way to interfere with the passage of the Bill.
§ On Question, Motion agreed to: Amendments reported accordingly.
§ Clause 1:
§ Application of Act.
§
(2) The powers conferred by this Act on a highway authority shall be exercisable—
(a) in the case of a bridge in a county borough, by the council of the borough.
§ THE FIRST COMMISSIONER OF WORKS (THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY) moved, in subsection (2), at the end of paragraph (a), to insert: "(b) In the case of a bridge in the City of London by the Common Council of the City." The noble Marquess said: This Amend- 426 ment is put down because it is desirable to include the City of London among the highway authorities who may take action under the provisions of this Bill.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 1, line 16, at end insert ("(b) In the case of a bridge in the City of London by the Common Council of the City").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)
§ Clause 3:
§ Power to make orders as to reconstruction, maintenance, etc., of bridges.
§
(2) Subject to the provisions of this Act the Minister on any such application may make an order, and may by the order—
(c) modify, so far as he considers necessary to give effect to the order, any statutory provisions applicable to a bridge other than the provisions of any general Act; so, however, that, in the case of a bridge crossing a railway or a canal, he shall not without the consent of the owner of the railway or canal modify any provisions relating to the headway of that bridge or the width of the canal and, in the case of a swing bridge, he shall not modify any provisions relating to precedence of traffic;
§ LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAM moved, in subsection (2), to leave out paragraph (e). The noble Lord said: My Lords, paragraph (e) introduces the Minister and says that, notwithstanding any statutory provisions, he may modify, so far as he considers necessary to give effect to the Order, any statutory provisions applicable to a bridge other than the provisions of any General Act. The effect of that is that, the railway companies having agreed with the Minister that he shall not exercise these powers where they are concerned, the Minister is left to exercise these powers and over-ride statutory provisions in the ease of private people. I therefore desire to leave out that provision. It is of no use in the Bill. Leaving it out would not affect the Bill, but it would emphasise the opinion held 427 in both Houses that the power of Ministers to vary Acts of Parliament must stop. If it is thought necessary to alter an Act of Parliament, let us alter it, but do not let us leave it to the opinion of a Minister to decide whether he will alter it or will leave it.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 4, line 3, leave out paragraph ("(e)").—(Lord Banbury of Southam.)
§ THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRYMy Lords, the noble Lord is always very vigilant in defending the rights of the private individual and I feel sure that most of your Lordships are thoroughly in agreement with him on that principle. I would suggest to him that in this Bill the dangers which he sees really do not exist and that the powers invested in the Minister are of a very limited and minor character. In the first place, he cannot alter the effect of any Public Act as applied to a bridge and in the second place the Minister can only alter the effect of a Private Act in so far as it is necessary to give effect to the Order. I mean by that that he can only do so in cases where the provisions of the Private Act would defeat the intentions of this Bill. All the really vital points from the owner's point of view, such as the headway, or the width of a canal, and the precedence of traffic, are specifically excluded.
The sort of provision in a Private Act which might have to be modified would be one providing that a bridge should be maintained to a certain width between the parapets. Unless the Minister was in the position to modify such a provision it would be impossible for the bridge to be reconstructed to a width adequate to the volume of traffic on the road. One of the main objects of the Bill is to provide a ready means for overcoming impediments which are created by the provisions of Private Acts. Without such means, reconstruction of a bridge maintained by a statutory undertaking might in many cases require a separate Act of Parliament. The noble Lord will see that the object of the Bill is to overcome all those difficulties which now exist by reason of there being no powers for the highway authority to be brought in contact with the owners for the purpose of removing disabilities or for the proper working of 428 all the matters connected with bridges throughout the country.
§ LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAMTo what bridges does this clause actually apply? It does not apply to railway bridges or bridges over canals.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRYI think the noble Lord is wrong. It does apply to bridges over canals.
§ LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAMThen I do not understand the object of these words of the paragraph:—
so, however, that, in the case of a bridge crossing a railway or a canal, he shall not without the consent of the owner … modify any provisions.That, of course, I agree to. If it is applied to bridges crossing a canal, what is the use of it?
§ THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRYI thought I had been able to explain to the noble Lord that there are various provisions in Private Acts which it is only possible to overcome by another Private Act. This Bill enables the Minister to make such Orders for the purposes of this Bill as are necessary to bring bridges up to the requirements of modern traffic.
§ LORD BANBURY OF SOUTHAMThen what it amounts to practically is this. If there is a bridge with certain provisions under a Private Act then, with the consent of the owners, certain things can be done. If that is so, I have no objection to it.
§ THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRYI can say to the noble Lord that nothing will be done under this Bill which is not in accordance with our modern ideas. I doubt very much whether any occasion will arise when the Minister will find himself in conflict with any private individual.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§
THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved, after subsection (3), to insert:
(4) Before making any. Order under this section with respect to a bridge in a Metropolitan borough upon an application to which the London County Council are not parties, the Minister shall consult with that council.
§ The noble Marquess said: My Lords, this Amendment provides that before any Order is made by the Minister in respect of a bridge in the administrative County 429 of London he shall consult with the London County Council unless they are parties to the application. The position in London is a peculiar one in that the Metropolitan boroughs are the highway authorities but the London County is the improvement authority for the whole County.
§ Amendment moved—
§ Clause 3, page 4, line 27, at the end insert the said new subsection.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)
§ Clause 4 [Provisions as to bridges of railway and canal companies]:
§ THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRYYour Lordships will remember that on the Committee stage there were a number of Amendments introduced by my noble friend Lord Younger. They were all incorporated in the Bill, but we have found that they can be put into the Bill in a better form and I therefore move the same Amendments in another form. This is the first of this series of Amendments.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 5, lines 17 and 18, leave out ("an Order made under this Act").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)
§
Amendment moved—
Page 5, lines 19 and 20, leave out ("company or dock authority") and insert ("owners of a bridge").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)
§ Amendments moved—
§ Page 5, line 22, leave out ("company or dock authority") and insert ("owners").
§ Page 5, line 24, leave out ("company or dock authority") and insert ("owners").
§ Page 5, line 28, leave out ("company or dock authority") and insert ("owners").
§ Page 5, lines 34 and 35, leave out ("company or dock authority") and insert ("owners of the bridge").
§ Page 5, lines 37 and 38, leave out ("the railway or canal or lock, passage or other work") and insert ("that railway, canal, lock, passage or work").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)
§ Clause 6 [Apportionment of Costs]:
§ THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRYMy Lords, I have a number of drafting Amendments to this clause.
§ Amendments moved—
§ Page 6, line 40, after ("authorities") insert ("entitled to exercise with respect to the bridge the powers conferred by this Act").
§ page 7, line 3, leave out ("or any") and insert ("of a railway company or of a canal company or a").
§ page 7, line 5, leave out from ("the") to ("by") in line 7, and insert ("owners of that railway, canal, lock, passage or work").
§ page 7, line 7, leave out from ("alteration") to ("due") in line 9, and insert ("thereof").
§ page 7, lines 10 and 11, leave out ("company or authority") and insert ("owners").
§ page 7, line 31, leave out ("or lock or passage") and insert ("of a railway company or of a canal company or a railway, lock, passage or other work of a dock authority").
§ page 7, lines 36 and 37, leave out ("owner of the railway or canal or lock or passage") and insert ("owners of that railway, canal, lock, passage or work").
§ page 7, lines 38 and 39, leave out ("of the railway or canal or lock or passage") and insert ("thereof").
§ page 8, line 2, leave out ("for") and insert ("of").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)
§ LORD STANLEY of ALDERLEY moved, after Clause 11, to insert the following new clause:—
§ For protection of Weaver Navigation Trustees.
§ " . An order made under this Act with respect to a bridge owned by the Weaver Navigation Trustees shall not without the consent of the Trustees either require any reconstruction or improvement of the bridge to be carried out otherwise than by the Trustees or direct the structure of the bridge to be maintained otherwise than by the Trustees or transfer the property in the structure of the bridge to a highway authority or in the case of a swing bridge require the bridge to be operated otherwise than by the Trustees."
§ The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment was put down on the Committee stage, when the noble Marquess promised to give it his consideration. I understand that he is prepared to accept it in its present form and accordingly I beg to move.
§ Amendment moved—
§ After Clause 11, insert the said new clause.—(Lord Stanley of Alderley.)
431§ THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRYMy Lords, you will remember that the noble Lord moved the addition of this clause on the Committee stage and I gave him an assurance that I would have the matter considered if he would bring it up again on Report. I am authorised to say that the Government are prepared to accept this Amendment. The Weaver Navigation Trustees are in a very exceptional position because: (1), members of the county council and nominees of the county council constitute the majority of the trustees; (2), any profits on the undertaking go to the reduction of rates; (3), the navigation is used by seagoing vessels of large tonnage and most of the bridges are, in consequence, exceptional in character as regards headway and width; and (4), the navigation therefore presents certain analogies to a dock undertaking. Accordingly the Government are prepared to accept this Amendment.
§ Clause 13 [Definitions]:
§ THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRYMy Lords, I have two consequential Amendments to this clause.
§ Amendments moved—
§ Page 10, line 12, at end insert ("and the common council of the City of London").
§ Page 10, line 13, after ("means") insert ("the owners of").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)