COMMONS AMENDMENT. (Hansard, 31 July 1930)

§ EARL DE LA WARR
My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth agree with the Commons in the said Amendment.

§ LORD DYNEVOR
My Lords, I think this is rather an important question. The clause is called "Maintenance of drains." The House of Commons is suggesting in perhaps a dozen places to alter the word "drain" and put in the word "watercourse." But the word "drain" was in the Bill as originally drafted when introduced in your Lordships' House, and later on I see that the definition of a watercourse on page 34 is also supposed to be altered, but as it stands now the definition of a "drain" on page 34 includes a stream, a ditch, a cut, a culvert, a dyke, or a sluice. So your Lordships will see that it does not include a watercourse. We are asked now to put in the word "watercourse' as well as "drain." I am advised that the word "watercourse" covers a larger matter than a. "drain" for the reason that a local authority can turn water into a watercourse but they have no power to turn water into a drain. 1168 Therefore, the drain that a landowner may be called upon to clear out is a much smaller thing than the watercourse that he may he called upon to clear out. Unless the Government can give me a very strong reason for the alteration in their original proposal I think we had better stick to the original word.

§ EARL DE LA WARR
My Lords, I hope I shall be able to satisfy the noble Lord. The principle of this clause was originally accepted by Parliament in connection with the Land Drainage Act, 1926, where it formed Section 2. The clause was designed to fulfil a long-felt want where persons were failing to maintain their drains, with the result that land in the vicinity was flooded through no fault of the owners of that land. The original section of the 1926 Act was drafted so that the clause only applied to "drains" which were defined as including any stream, ditch, cut, culvert, dyke or sluice. In this form the clause became part of the present Bill, and was Clause 34 in the Bill as it left this House. In the course of Committee in another place an Amendment was moved to omit the word "drain" and to substitute the word "watercourse" which in the Definition Clause of the Bill covers practically everything through which water flows from the largest river down to the smallest drain. Consequently the clause now appears as Clause 35 with "watercourse" included.
The point was at once raised, however, that the substitution of "watercourse" for drain would render it possible for the powers under the clause to be exercised unfairly—namely, against a riparian owner of a large river like the Thames. Accordingly, further Amendments were made by inserting in the clause a definite indication that the term "watercourse" was not intended to include the "main river," which is the responsibility of a catchment board. There need be no alarm, therefore, as to this clause being used unfairly, although "drain" has been altered to "watercourse," because there is still the appeal against a notice provided in subsection (5) which contains several heads under which an appeal can be made.

§ LORD DYNEVOR
I am afraid I am very dissatisfied. I do not realise at all why the words should be altered. If it 1169 is so important to have the word "watercourse" instead of the word "drain," why was it not put in before?