§ LORD LOVAT rose to call the attention of His Majesty's Government to the question of piers in the Highland counties, and to ask His Majesty's Government what is their policy in regard to the construction of new piers and the maintenance and upkeep of old piers, especially in the districts that are not served by any other means of communication. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I rise to ask His Majesty's Government what is their policy about piers in the Highland counties and in that I include of course boat slips. I believe that a Commission was set up and toured this district, but I have heard of no result from its inquiries. The position as regards communications in the Highlands is very serious. Your Lordships are aware of the state of agriculture generally, so that you can imagine what is the position 780 when farmers receive low prices for their products and at the same time have to pay heavy charges—perhaps £1 for rail freight or cartage and a similar amount for steamer transport. With such conditions the position of agriculturists is not a happy one.
§ My information is that a very large proportion of these piers are getting into such a state of disrepair that if the present neglect is continued it will have a very serious effect on the whole of this part of the Highlands. The tenure of the piers varies considerably. They are financed in some cases partly by the landowner, partly by the parish council, and partly by what used to be the Congested Districts Board and is now the Ministry of Agriculture. If the Ministry of Agriculture will not do anything, the landowner certainly cannot, because the majority of the piers do not give any financial return, and the parish council, of course, is defunct and no longer functions. Therefore nothing is being done and unless something is done it will be, as I say, a great blow to agriculture. The present condition of the piers is undoubtedly resulting in a considerable movement of population. If the Government is unable at this time, when the need for economy is so pressing, to provide money for putting these piers into repair, I would suggest that some money might be obtained by not spending the whole of the grant now made for providing new small holdings. Your Lordships are probably aware that something like £200,000 a year is spent in that way and the average cost of providing a small holding is something in the neighbourhood of £900. A sum of £30,000 or £40,000 spread over a period of five years would probably suffice to put these piers in order, and I believe it would result in keeping more people on the land than is being done to-day by the small holdings policy.
§ What happens at present is that a large farm is broken up and actually fewer people remain on the land than were there before. We cannot afford to let that state of affairs go on. If the Government would cut out of its small holdings programme those divisions of farms which do not definitely increase the number of people on the land, then I believe they could get enough money—£30,000 or £40,000 a year—to put these piers in repair in a period of four or five years 781 There is a further suggestion I would like to make to the Government, and that is that when the piers have been put into repair it is essential that arrangements should be made to keep them in repair. The only authorities who can do that are the county councils, and I suggest that there should be a definite rating for this purpose in pier areas just as there is a definite rating in water areas or scavenging or lighting areas. In that way I think that those who benefit by the piers will be brought to see that it is to their advantage to keep the piers in order. The position is definitely serious and is getting worse. Many of the crofts in the Western Highlands are not occupied to-day by able-bodied men. They are occupied by old people, and when those people die the young folk will refuse to return to these crofts because they know that agriculture is impossible there under present conditions.
§ LORD STRATHCONA AND MOUNT ROYALMy Lords, I should like to thank the noble Lord for suiting the convenience of His Majesty's Government and of myself in regard to this Question. I am glad to have an opportunity of informing your Lordships of the present position in regard to the piers in the Highland counties. The problem of communications in the Highland districts is one that has engaged the attention of successive Governments for many years. There have been projects for light railways, and projects for roads, but the fundamental problem, naturally enough when you are dealing with Highland and mountainous country sparsely populated, has been that of securing the supply by sea of the necessities of life to the people and an outlet by sea for the products of their industry, fish, wool, live stock and so on.
As long ago as 1891 Parliament passed the Western Highlands and Islands (Scotland) Works Act to enable county councils in the Highland counties with the aid of Government grants to provide piers and harbours in those counties. Under that Act a number of useful piers and harbours were built. In addition to these numerous piers were built by the proprietors of the estates on which they were situated. These constitute the great majority of the piers in these counties. There are also a few piers vested in statutory trusts. The public money 782 granted under the Act of 1891 has long since been exhausted, but the procedure of the Act is still applied in connection with small works such as jetties and slips, which are from time to time constructed with the aid of grants from the sum of £10,000 which has been voted for many years to the Department of Agriculture of Scotland for the purpose of aiding the provision or improvement of piers, boat slips, roads and other works in the congested districts.
In course of time many of the piers and harbours which were built by estate proprietors or county councils have fallen into disrepair. The causes are not far to seek. Even when powers were taken to charge dues the revenue from that source has been far from sufficient to defray the cost of upkeep. In many cases it is so small as hardly to defray the cost of collection and often no dues are charged at all. So far as county council undertakings are concerned the Act of 1891 gives a power to levy a rate to supplement revenue from dues, but the rate which can be levied in respect of the undertakings in a county is limited to a penny in the pound leviable over the whole county and it will be readily appreciated that this rating power is of no great value. We have the situation now that there is an urgent need for the renovation of a number of essential piers throughout the Highland districts, piers which are essential for the maintenance of communications. The shipping companies, which have been busy reorganising their transport arrangements, are hampered by the conditions prevailing at their places of call and in some cases have had to contemplate the abandonment of calls.
At the present time of intense stringency, it is quite impossible for the Government to embark upon any new scheme of State assistance to pier and harbour undertakings, but they are of the opinion that, whether or not it may be found possible within a measurable period to place additional funds at the disposal of the Department of Agriculture or the Fisheries Board, it is desirable without delay to confer new powers on local authorities to acquire and to provide for the proper maintenance of such undertakings. Accordingly the Secretary of State has it in view to introduce a Bill empowering local authorities to acquire piers and harbours by 783 simple transfer from private owners, to fix schedules of dues and charges subject to appeal to a central Department, and to levy rates to make good any deficiency in the revenue from dues. In the case of a pier or harbour so acquired by a county council, or by a county and town council in combination, the proposal is that a special rating district should be constituted. I have noted the noble Lord's suggestion as regards small holdings, but the noble Lord will not, I hope, expect a definite answer under that head. I shall bring it to the notice of the Secretary of State and may be able to give an answer at a later date.
The noble Lord referred to the construction of new piers. I think that the view of the Departments principally concerned is that in general there is no pressing need for new piers. Indeed I am not sure but that under the stimulus of the Act of 1891 piers were in some cases built which were not economically sound propositions and for which there was—I will not say no need, but at any rate not sufficient need to justify the expenditure entailed. However that may be, there is no reason why in the proposed legislation dealing with this subject such powers as may be necessary should not be given to the appropriate local authorities to undertake with the minimum of expense, the construction of new works which may seem to them to be required. It is proposed therefore to include in the Bill provisions similar to those contained in the Fishery Harbours Act, 1915, an Act which applies only to England, for a simple procedure by Provisional Orders made by the Secretary of State for Scotland. These provisions are directed primarily to another kind of case, that of the fishery harbours on the East coast, but they will also be available for works of the type which the noble Lord has in view.
Perhaps I ought to add that there are a number of points on which a final decision has not yet been reached. It is not altogether easy, for example, to determine whether and to what extent the new code should be applied to those piers and harbours at present vested in local authorities, whether under the Act of 1891 or by Provisional Orders. Whatever may be the ultimate decision on that point, the Government's view is that in future it should be an essential condition of any State contribution towards the construe- 784 tion or reconstruction of pier and harbour works that the authority responsible should accept the obligations and conditions of the new Act with respect to the future maintenance of the works. It is only on such terms as these that further expenditure of public money could be justified.
I agree with the noble Lord that the position is a very serious one and I can assure him that the Government have the interests of agriculturists in the Western Islands and Highlands very much at heart. The noble Lord referred to the question of jetties and boat slips. The legislation proposed by the Government will cover that type of works as well as larger works, but I fear what I have said as to the impossibility of any new scheme of State assistance for pier and harbour undertakings applies also under the present financial stringency to these smaller works. I have no doubt that the noble Lord's representations on this question will receive the fullest possible consideration from the Department in considering the allocation of funds at their disposal. In the near future the Secretary of State will, as I have said and hope, introduce the Bill and it is hoped that opportunitites will be given to local authorities and others interested to examine the Bill before it is passed through this and the other House. I am advised that there are several points in the Bill which require consultation with other Departments and that probably accounts for any delay so far in its introduction. I hope I have dealt with all the points the noble Lord has raised and I am only sorry that the circumstances of the day render the substance of my answer not as satisfactory as I should like it to be.