ROAD AND RAIL TRAFFIC BILL.

HL Deb 13 November 1933 vol 89 cc167-252

Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Motion agreed to. House in Committee accordingly:

[The EARL OF ONSLOW in the Chair.]

Clause 1:

Licensing of goods vehicles. 1.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this Part of this Act, no person shall—

1. (a) use a goods vehicle on a road for the carriage of goods for hire or reward, or cause or permit a goods vehicle to be so used; or
2. (b) use a goods vehicle on a road for the carriage of goods for or in connection with any trade or business carried on by him, or cause or permit a goods vehicle to be so used,

unless there is in force a licence authorising the use of the vehicle by him for that purpose.

(2) In this Part of this Act the expression "goods vehicle" means a motor vehicle constructed or adapted for use for the carriage of goods or a trailer so constructed or adapted, and the expression "licence" means a licence granted under this Part of this Act.

(3) For the purposes of this Part of this Act—

1. (a) the delivery or collection by a person of goods sold, used or let on hire or hire purchase in the course of a trade or business carried on by him;
2. (b) the delivery or collection by a person of goods which have been, or are to be, subjected to a process or treatment in the course of a trade or business carried on by him;
3. (c) the carriage by a person engaged in agriculture in any locality of goods for or in connection with the business of agri- 168 culture carried on by another person in that locality, so long as the goods are carried in a vehicle which the person carrying them is authorised by a licence to use for the carriage of goods for or in connection with his business;
4. (d) the carriage of goods in a vehicle in respect of which a licence has been taken out by a manufacturer or dealer under Section nine of the Roads Act, 1920, or by a repairer under Section fifteen of the Finance Act, 1922, in accordance with the regulations applicable to that licence;
5. (e) the carriage of goods in a vehicle by a manufacturer, agent, or dealer, whilst the vehicle is being used by him for demonstration purposes;

shall not be deemed to constitute a carrying of the goods for hire or reward.

(4) It is hereby declared that, for the purposes of this Part of this Act, the performance by a local or public authority of its functions shall be deemed to be the carrying on of a business.

(5) This section shall not apply—

1. (a) to the use of a vehicle (including a trailer drawn thereby) in any case where the excise duty in respect of the vehicle under section thirteen of the Finance Act, 1920, is chargeable at one of the rates applicable to vehicles specified in subparagraph (a) or sub-paragraph (d) of paragraph 4, or in sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph 5, of the Second schedule to the Finance Act, 1920, as amended by the Finance Act, 1933, or any subsequent enactment, for any of the agricultural or other ancillary purposes for which exclusively the vehicle must be used I if the duty is to remain chargeable at that rate;
2. (b) to the use for any purpose other than the carriage of goods for hire or reward of a trailer when drawn by a vehicle constructed solely for the carriage of not more than seven passengers exclusive of the driver and their effects;
3. (c) to the use of a tramcar or trolley vehicle in pursuance of the powers of any special Act of Parliament or any order having the force of an Act;
4. (d) to the use of a public service vehicle as a stage carriage, express carriage, or contract carriage in pursuance of a licence granted under the Road Traffic Act, 1930;
5. (e) to the use of a hackney carriage as defined in Section four of the Customs and Inland Revenue Act. 1888, when being used as such a carriage;
6. (f) to the use of a vehicle for road cleansing, road watering or the collection or disposal of refuse, night-soil or the contents of cesspools, or for the purposes of the enactments relating to weights and measures or the sale of food and drugs by a local authority or any person acting in pursuance of a contract with a local authority;
7. (g) to the use of a vehicle for police, fire brigade or ambulance purposes;
8. (h) to the use of a vehicle for towing a disabled motor vehicle or for removing goods from a disabled vehicle to a place of safety;
169
9. (i) to the use of a vehicle for miners' rescue purposes under the provisions of Section eighty-five of the Coal Mines Act, 1911;
10. (j) to the use of a vehicle for any purpose specified in regulations, or the use for any purpose of a vehicle of any class or description so specified.

(6) If any person uses a vehicle, or causes or permits a vehicle to be used, in contravention of this section, ho shall be guilty of an offence under this Part of this Act.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR AIR (THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY) moved, in subsection (1), to leave out all words after "carriage of goods" in paragraph (a), and insert: (" (a,) for hire or reward; or (b) for or in connection with any trade or business carried on by him; except under a licence.

The noble Marquess said: This Amendment consists of a simplification of subsection (1) of Clause 1. The words "or cause or permit a goods vehicle to be so used" have been omitted both in paragraph (a) and in paragraph (b). This is rendered possible by the precise definition of "use" which is contained in the next Government Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 1, line 12, leave out from ("goods") to the end of the subsection, and insert the said new words.—(The Marquess of Londoaderry.)

THE LORD CHAIRMAN

I shall put that the words from "goods" in line 12 to the end of page 1 stand part.

LORD ILIFFE,

who had an Amendment on the Paper to leave out paragraph (b) of subsection (i) said: I am going to ask your Lordships to disagree with this Amendment and so clear the way for the next Amendment which is on the Order Paper. I desire to oppose this Amendment because it requires the private carrier, who does not carry goods for hire or reward, to be licensed. I desire, and I hope your Lordships will agree with me, to remove the C licences altogether from the scheme of licensing under the Bill. The holder of a C licence is a private carrier; that is, a merchant or manufacturer who uses a goods vehicle exclusively for the purpose of his own business. The owner of an A licence is a public carrier who uses a vehicle only for carrying goods for hire or reward, and the holder of a B licence is a person who uses a vehicle partly for his own business and partly to carry goods for hire or reward. No fewer than 75 per cent. of the total number of the goods vehicles on the road come within the C category. The licensing authority has no control whatever over the number of licences issued. A holder may obtain just as many licences for as many vehicles as he chooses. The Royal Commission on Transport recommended that the licensing system should not extend to those vehicles, and that is a very important point.

Furthermore the C licence is quite unnecessary for the enforcement of the security conditions in Clause 8 of the Bill; that is, as to the fitness of a vehicle and the safety limits of the hours of duty. These are all of them statutory requirements which, if not observed, can be enforced by prosecution and by fine. The safety of the vehicle can be ensured by examiners under the clauses of the Bill because their powers extend to all vehicles, including exempted vehicles, and are not limited in any way to licensed vehicles, and the records which the C licence holder is required to keep involve a good deal of additional clerical work and in my opinion really serve no useful purpose whatever. The public expense is very greatly increased by including these additional quarter of a million licences. Under the Bill the Government have seen fit to exempt the farmer's lorry from licensing and I can see no reason why this exemption should be denied to the grocer's vehicle or the brewer's or the corn merchant's or any other similar type of vehicle. The main objection to a C licence is that it throws an unnecessary burden on the trade of the country and, as I have already pointed out to your Lordships, the Royal Commission on Transport was against including these vehicles, which are really private vehicles only used for the carriage of goods for the business of the licensee and not used in any way for hire or reward. The Royal Commission on Transport, as I say, was against it and it seems to me really to be rather unnecessary to add this further complication to an already very complicated world.

LORD SANDHURST

May I be allowed to add a few words to what the noble Lord, Lord Iliffe, has said, because I am not in the same position as most of your Lordships? I am in the position of one who has had control of a vehicle which would come under a C licence. In other words, I have been a small trader—admittedly a very small trader. I was in business up in Scotland and, for the purpose of that business and in order to attract to it the custom of the farmers of the district, I initiated a system of petrol supply by which I not only delivered petrol to the farmer at his farm, but delivered both petrol and paraffin to the farmer's tractor on the field where it was ploughing. Under the provisions of this Bill it would have been necessary for me to have had a C licence for that vehicle, and every time I. received a telephone message from the farmer to say that his tractor mechanic had omitted to fill the tractor with paraffin and that he wanted another four gallons to enable him to carry on his work, it would have been necessary when I sent out the motor cycle and side-car, which I had specially adapted for the purpose of carrying that paraffin to the tractor in the field, for a clerk to make a note of all the particulars of that journey. My profit on that paraffin would have disappeared. In fact, it would not have been worth my while to do the work at all. I submit that in that way C licences will cause very great hardship.

THE PARLIAMENTARY UNDERSECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE COLONIES (THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH)

The noble Lord, Lord [...]iffe, has made a speech which he would naturally have made upon his own Amendment which follows and he did so in order to safeguard himself. The effect of his Amendment would be to exempt private carriers entirely from the early provisions of this Bill. I hope your Lordships will not agree to that Amendment. It is perfectly true that the Royal Commission on Transport did not recommend that what are called ancillary users should be brought under this provision. On the other hand, the Salter Conference was unanimous in recommending that they should come under the provision for C licences. They recommended that they should be given licences freely, but at the same time they considered it was quite essential for the proper regulation of traffic upon the road that they should come under these provisions of the Bill.

It is really absolutely essential that these private carriers should be subject not only to the safety provisions, but also to the provisions of Clause 14, which deals with the keeping of records as to hours of work, journeys, loads, and various other things of that kind. I think your Lordships will see that, in view of the fact that between 70 and 80 per cent. of the goods vehicles on the road are goods vehicles which belong to these private owners, it is quite essential that they should come under these provisions. I should like to make a further point that it is notorious that some of the worst offenders in matters of the kind I have indicated are the small operators who under the provisions of the Bill would be regarded as private users and would be required to take out C licences. I therefore most earnestly beg your Lordships to pass the Government Amendment and not to accept the Amendment which follows because I think otherwise the whole structure of this Bill will be upset.

LORD ILIFFE

In view of the statement of the noble Earl I do not propose to proceed with my Amendment.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRYmoved to insert after subsection (2): (3) When a goods vehicle is being used on a road for the carriage of goods, the driver of the vehicle, if it belongs to him or is in his possession under an agreement for hire, hire purchase or loan, and in any other case the person whose agent or servant the driver is, shall, for the purposes of this Part of this Act be deemed to be the person by whom the vehicle is being used.

(4) Where at any time goods are carried in a goods vehicle, being a vehicle which has been let on hire by the person who at the time of the carriage of the goods is within the meaning of this Part of this Act the user of the vehicle, the goods shall be deemed to be carried by that person for hire or reward."

The noble Marquess said: This Amendment consists of the addition of two new subsections which are intended to remove any ambiguity as to the person who is "using" a vehicle under a licence, within the meaning of the Bill. Without some such precise definition it would not be possible to fix responsibility for the observance of the conditions attached to a licence. The first of the two new subsections provides that the driver if he is the owner, or has effective possession, of the vehicle, and in any other case the person whose agent or servant the driver is, shall be deemed to be the person by whom the vehicle is being used. In other words, the driver if he is the owner of the vehicle, and otherwise the person who employs the driver, is regarded as the person in effective control of the vehicle, and therefore responsible for its proper operation under a licence. The second subsection is declaratory in character. It states in effect that a person who lets out on hire a vehicle with a driver in order to carry someone else's goods shall be deemed to be carrying goods for hire or reward. This point is of importance in the delimitation of the operations that can be carried out under A and B licences on the one hand and C licences on the other. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 2, line 11, at end insert the said new subsections—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next Amendment is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 2, line 28, after ("his") insert ("agricultural").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next two are drafting Amendments.

Amendments moved—

Page 2, line 29, leave out ("in respect of which a licence has been") and insert ("which is being used under, and in accordance with the regulations applicable to, a licence").

Page 2, line 33, leave out from ("1922") to the end of line 35.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

EARL HOWE moved, in subsection (5), after paragraph (b), to insert: (c) to the use of a vehicle constructed for the carriage of not more than seven passengers and adapted or equipped for the carriage of samples of goods by a commercial traveller or agent where no goods except samples are carried in the vehicle and where the weight of the goods so carried does not exceed three hundredweights.

The noble Earl said: I hope your Lord-ships will allow me to give a few reasons why this Amendment comes to be moved. This point was debated first of all in Standing Committee and on the Report stage in another place, and was left undetermined. It relates to the commercial traveller's ear, which in some cases would be a "goods vehicle" within the definition on page 2, line 7—namely, "a motor vchicle constructed or adapted for use for the carriage of goods." The difficulty arises out of the expression "adapted for use." The Amendment proposes to exempt from the licensing system under the Bill a private car used by a commercial traveller for the carriage of samples, and adapted for that purpose, with a locker or cabinet for convenience in handling his samples. Your Lordships have no doubt seen many vehicles of this description on the roads to-day.

If some Amendment of this kind is not made, the vehicle is liable to be treated as a goods vehicle and would require a C licence. The point was raised in Standing Committee by several Amend-ments, and the Minister made several points with regard to it in another place. He said that he was sure. that the mere fact of putting some racks to carry dresses in the back of a private car would not bring that car within the definition of a "goods vehicle," and therefore would not bring it within the scope of the Bill, and there could be no need for apprehension that a traveller who merely fitted up the back of a private car for the carriage of his samples would bring himself within the scope of the Bill. He then said: I will certainly tell the Committee that we are at one on this, that we all want to exclude from the operation of the Bill the man who merely puts samples in the back of his private car, and, although I am advised that the position is clear now, I will make quite certain, between now and the Report stage, that in fact a case of that kind is covered.

Then he made another promise: The promise that I give is with regard to the ordinary passenger car which may have been adapted for the carriage of samples. I give no promise whatsoever with regard to the ordinary goods vehicle which may or may not be said to be adapted for the carriage of samples, but which can in fact be used for the carriage of goods in the ordinary way.

The difficulty in this connection, I submit, 'arises from the fact that, instructions have been given to local authorities who issue motor car licences that private ears adapted for the ea triage of goods (which would include the rail for dresses or the locker or boxes) are to be classed as goods vehicles for the purposes of licence duty. The Minister admitted that this was not the intention. His objection to the Amendments moved in standing Committee was that they went a very long way beyond that, and would have enabled any one to have a ten-ton lorry and escape the provisions of the Act by calling the goods "samples." This objection is met in the Amendment now proposed, by the words "constructed for the carriage of not more than seven passengers." This is the ordinary definition of a private car. On Report stage in the House of Commons, when this Amendment was moved, the Minister resisted it but promised to look into the matter again. Unfortunately, the Bill does not seem to have dealt with it. The Bill carries its own definition on page 2, and the licensing authority under the Bill may take a different view from the Inland Revenue authorities who control the issue of the Excise licences under the Finance Act. The Amendment was originally proposed in order to give effect to the Minister's promises already referred to, and it was framed with the definite object of limiting the weight of samples which might he carried.

Amendment moved— Page 3, line 25, at end, insert the said new paragraph (c).—(Earl Howe.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I hope your Lordships will not accept this Amendment. The view of the Government is that the proper test in cases of this kind should be whether the vehicle in question is properly taxable as a private car or not. The definition of "goods vehicle" in subsection (2) of Clause 1 is "a motor vehicle constructed or adapted for use for the carriage of goods." Adaptation is a question of degree. If the adaptation results in what is substantially a goods carrying vehicle the vehicle should be treated as such and not as a private car. The definition of "goods vehicle" in the present Bill is in this respect the same as the definition used in the Finance Acts for the purpose of the assessment of Excise licence duty. If a vehicle, used by a commercial traveller, has been properly assessed as a motor car in the "horse power" class it would not be a goods vehicle for the purposes of the present Bill. On this 'and other similar points it is desirable that the Finance Acts and the present Bill should march together and the Amendment is on these grounds undesirable.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

EARL HOWE moved to insert after paragraph (b) in subsection 5: (c) to the use of a vehicle constructed and used for the purpose of a caravan or moveable dwelling and for no other purpose.

The noble Earl said: This Amendment is to cover the case of the caravan. The Minister promised in Standing Committee in the House of Commons to consider the point raised there, and said he accepted the principle that a vehicle generally used as a caravan dwelling should not be subject to the provisions of the Bill. The concluding words that I have submitted have been added to meet the risk of evasion, but the Amendment, I submit, is necessary, for otherwise you will have the curious situation that a trailer caravan, drawn by a private car, will be exempted, while a motor car which is a caravan will not be exempted, and because it carries furniture may be classed as a goods vehicle.

Amendment moved— Page 3, line 25, at end, insert the said new paragraph (c).—(Earl Howe.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I do not think this Amendment is at all necessary. If the vehicle is in fact used as a caravan or moveable dwelling and for no other purpose it is perfectly clear that it is not used in connection with any trade or business, and therefore would not come under the licensing provisions of the Bill. If, on the other hand, the vehicle is a caravan which (for example) carries goods for sale, then it would, and should, fall within the licensing provisions of the Bill. I do not think the instance that the noble Earl suggested is one which could possibly lead to any misunderstanding.

EARL HOWE

I cannot quite follow the explanation of the noble Earl. I do not know whether he has actually dealt with the point, as to a four-wheeled vehicle used as a caravan and manœuvring under its own opwer.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

That would not be a goods vehicle used in connection with any trade or business, and therefore would not come under the provisions of this Bill.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved, in subsection (1), after paragraph (e), to insert "(f) to the use of a vehicle for the purposes of funerals." The noble Marquess said: The effect of this Amendment is to exempt motor hearses from the licensing provisions of the Bill. These vehicles are technically goods vehicles, but their use is by their very nature restricted and highly specialised. The Minister undertook in the House of Commons to provide for their exemption from the licensing provisions of the Bill if there were any general desire in the industry to this effect. Although the industry is not unanimous on the point the British Undertakers' Association have by a substantial majority of their members asked for the exemption. The vehicles will, however, always he liable to inspection under the provisions of Clause 16 and they will have to conform with the general law and regulations as to the construction and use of motor vehicles.

Amendment moved— Page 3, line 37, at end insert the said paragraph.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next two Amendments are drafting.

Amendments moved—

Page 3, line 33, after ("use") insert ("by a local authority, or a person acting in pursuance of a contract with a local authority")

Page 4, line 1, leave out from ("drugs") to the end of line 3.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

EARL HOWE

had on the Paper an Amendment in subsection (5), after paragraph (g), to insert: (h) to the use of a vehicle constructed or adapted for use as a hearse and used for that purpose only. The noble Earl said: This point has already been covered by the Minister's Amendment. Therefore I do not move.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next Amendment is drafting.

Amendment moved— Page 4, line 16, leave out ("or causes or permits a vehicle to be used").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 1, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 2:

Classes of licences.

2.—(1) Licences shall be of the following classes:—

1. (a) public carriers' licences:
2. (b) limited carriers' licences:
3. (c) private carriers' licences.

(2) A public carrier's licence (in this Part of this Act referred to as "an A licence") shall entitle the holder thereof to use the authorised vehicles for the carriage of goods for hire or reward or for the carriage of goads for or in connection with his business as a carrier of goods, or, in the case of a person operating a canal, dock, or harbour undertaking, for or in connection with that undertaking subject to the condition that no vehicle which is for the time being an authorised vehicle shall be used for the carriage of goods for or in connection with any other trade or business carried on by him except such storage or warehousing of goods as may be incidental to his business as a carrier.

(3) A limited carrier's licence (in this Part of this Act referred to as "a B licence") shall entitle the holder thereof to use the authorised vehicles, as he thinks fit from time to time, either for the carriage of goods for or in connection with any trade or business carried on by him, or, subject to any conditions attached to the licence, for the carriage of goods for hire or reward.

(4) A private carrier's licence (in this Part of this Act referred to as "a C licence") shall entitle the holder thereof to use the authorised vehicles for the carriage of goods for or in connection with any trade or business carried on by him, subject to the condition that no vehicle which is for the time being an authorised vehicle shall be used for the carriage of goods for hire or reward.

(5) In this Part of this Act the expression "authorised vehicle" means in relation to any licence a vehicle authorised to be used thereunder.

(6) The vehicles authorised to be used under a licence shall be—

1. (a) such motor vehicles, being vehicles belonging to the holder of the licence or in his possession under a hire purchase agreement, as are specified in the licence;
2. (b) such number of motor vehicles, or of motor vehicles of any particular type or types hired by the holder of the licence, as is specified in the licence;
3. (c) such number of trailers, or of trailers of any particular type or types belonging to the holder of the licence, or in his possession under a hire purchase agreement, or hired by him, as is specified in the licence;
4. (d) in the case of a C licence, any motor vehicle belonging to the holder of the licence or in his possession under a hire purchase agreement, but acquired by him, or coining into his possession under such an agreement, only after the grant of the licence:

Provided that a motor vehicle which is acquired by or comes into the possession of the holder of a C licence after the grant thereof shall cease to be an authorised vehicle on the expiration of one month from the date on which it was acquired by him or came into his possession unless before the expiration of that period the holder delivers to the licensing authority a notice in the prescribed form of the vehicle having been acquired by him or having come into his possession.

(7) A motor vehicle specified in a licence shall not, while it remains so specified, he capable of being effectively specified in any other licence.

(8) A person may be the holder of two or more licences whether of the same class or of different classes.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved, in subsection (2), after "carrier of goods," to insert "whether by road transport or any other kind of transport." The noble Marquess said: The object of this Amendment is to make clear that the expression "carrier of goods" is not confined to a single form of transport.

Amendment moved— Page 4, line 27, at end insert the said words.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved, in subsection (2), to leave out "or, in the case of a person operating a canal, dock, or harbour undertaking, for or in connection with that undertaking subject to the condition" and to insert "but it shall be a condition of the licence." The noble Marquess said: This is a drafting Amendment, designed to remove an element of obscurity which resulted from the interpolation in lines 23 and 29 of the reference to canals, docks and harbours. The interpolation was made by way of an Amendment in the House of Commons.

Amendment moved— Page 4, line 28, leave out from the beginning of the line to ("that") in line 30 and insert the said new words.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next two Amendments are drafting.

Amendments moved—

Page 4, line 35, at end insert: ("In relation to a licence held by a person carrying on a canal, clock or harbour undertaking, the reference in this subsection to use of vehicles for the carriage of goods for or in connection with the business of the holder of a licence as a carrier of goods, shall include a reference to the use of vehicles for the carriage of goods for, or in connection with, that undertaking ")

Page 5, line 1, leave out ("attached") and insert ("which the licensing authority, in the exercise of his discretion to attach conditions to a B licence, may attach")—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

LORD COZENS-HARDY moved, in subsection (4), after "him," to insert "or in association with him." The noble Lord said: In introducing the Bill the noble Marquess mentioned as one of its objects the prevention of overcrowding in the transport industry. Without an Amendment to some such effect as this there would certainly be a tendency to increase quite unnecessarily the number of vehicles on the road. Many large businesses which are not merely holding companies have other companies closely associated with them, sometimes even occupying part of the one works. Very often it is convenient for one of such companies to perform various services for both. Transport is one of those services, and it can often be economically provided by the larger company. Under the Bill as it stands the larger company must cease to use its lorries to help its associate unless the larger company forfeits the right to a C licence. The case is not answered by saying that the larger company can get an A or a B licence in such cases. The C licences admittedly have advantages, and there is no reason why the company should be deprived of those advantages. The larger company would, of course, be carrying goods which technically were not "for or in connection with" its own trade, and it would technically also be carrying goods "for hire or reward."

There are cases of this kind in which associated companies carry on a trade within the works of a larger company, enjoying the common facilities of the works. The larger company may possibly manage the business of the associate without even holding a controlling interest in it. I think your Lordships will agree that in such cases a C licence should be applicable, and it is to permit this that I have put down this Amendment. I have tried in a subsequent Amendment to define "associated trade" so as to confine it to genuine cases where the transport of goods in common between the two companies is only an incident of their association, and your Lordships will observe that one of the requirements of the Amendment is that the holder of the C licence must either hold a substantial interest in the associated company—and I should be prepared to accept 51 per cent. as a definition of "substantial interest"—or the holder of the licence must be actually managing the manufacturing operations of the associated company. I have had some discussion with the Minister's advisers on these points, and I have endeavoured in this, which is a revised, form of the Amendment, to meet some of the objections which have been raised. Unfortunately, time has not permitted the discussion of the Amendment in this revised form, but I hope that the noble Marquess will be able to indicate acceptance of the principle, if not of the actual wording.

I submit that this is really a question which has not been fully considered by the Government. It would appear that an easy course has been adopted, with the result that the Bill as it stands puts obstacles in the way of arrangements of this kind, which are economical to the associated companies and cannot in any way defeat the objects of the Bill. I understand that the Government are prepared to accept an Amendment standing later on the Paper in the name of my noble friend Lord Melchett, which brings 90 per cent. subsidiaries within the C licence, but that does not in any way cover the cases that I have in mind. I should be interested to know why there is charm in 90 per cent. as compared with 51 per cent. Why should evasion be feared with 51 per cent. and not feared with 90 per cent.? Then there is the other class of case, where the business of the associated company is managed by the holder of a C licence, the business being probably inside his own works. Why should the advantages and economies of a C licence be denied to the holder in those cases? Any attempt on the part of a C licence holder to use the associated company for carrying on the business of an ordinary carrier is prevented by paragraph (b) (i) of my later Amendment. If the noble Marquess does not feel able to accept the Amendment in its present form, I would press for real consideration of this question. The cases I have referred to are of real importance and should, I think, be met in some way. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 7, after ("him") insert ("or in association with him").—(Lord Cozens-Hardy.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The noble Lord can be quite sure it would give me no satisfaction or pleasure to refuse any Amendment he puts forward, but I am bound to say after having listened to his speech, and with every desire to meet him in any way, I have not been able to find any special reason why we should depart from the attitude we took up when he had previous conversation with the advisers of the Ministry of Transport. I quite follow what the noble Lord said. He is averse from what I may call the rigidity of the Bill, but I think he will agree with me when I say that the definition he makes in the word "association" is very loose, and I go so far as to say there might be very little connection between company No. 1 and the other companies in existence under the same holding. We have agreed, as the noble Lord is aware, to accept the Amendment which has been put down in the name of my noble friend Lord Melchett, and that covers the ground where there is 90 per cent. of the control in the hands of the holding company.

I did not gather from the speech of the noble Lord that he had any instance in mind. It seems to me that if there are only one or two companies that is a case on which we might have come discussion with the noble Lord, but if there is an association which extends over a very wide area the loose connection of all these companies might mean there was very little connection between one and the other, and that would be no reason for granting one C licence to the holding company as representing all the others. I think the noble Lord will also agree with me that it would place the licensing authority in a very difficult position, and impose responsibilities on them which we should not ask them to assume. In these circumstances I can only say to the noble Lord that, while we are prepared to accept the provisions of the new clause to follow Clause 10, as far as I can see we cannot possibly accept the Amendment which has been moved.

LORD COZENS-HARDY

The noble Marquess did not deal with the ether side of the Amendment, which is the case where the holder actually manages, so to say, inside his own works, business on behalf of the associated company.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

It is very difficult to legislate for every particular case. No doubt there are special cases. The general rule, I am instructed by the Ministry of Transport, is covered by the clause which has been put down by Lord Melchett. Beyond that there are special cases which I quite agree are matters for discussion, but as far as I know the noble Lord has not put forward a ease which has had the effect of convincing those who are advising me in the matter.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved, at the end of subsection (4), to insert: Notwithstanding anything in this part of this Act, the licensing authority may. in a case of emergency and subject to such conditions as ho thinks fit to impose, authorise the holder of a C licence to use an authorised vehicle for the carriage of goods fur any person to whom he lets the vehicle if the authority is satisfied that the needs of that person cannot conveniently be met from other sources. The noble Marquess said: As the Bill is now drafted the holder of a C licence (and indeed any member of the public) is entitled to let out a goods vehicle on hire as a chattel (that is, without driver), the control of the vehicle thereby passing entirely to the hirer and the vehicle being "used" under the hirer's licence. The holder of a C licence, however, would not be able to let out a vehicle on hire with driver as this would constitute using a vehicle for the carriage of goods for hire or reward. This will be found in the declaratory Amendment in the form of the new subsection (4). The proposed Amendment would enable the licensing authority, in case of emergency and subject to such conditions as he may think fit to impose, to authorise the holder of a, C licence to let on hire an authorised vehicle with driver if the licensing authority is satisfied that the needs of the prospective hirer cannot conveniently be met from other sources. I think it will appear to your Lordships that this degree of latitude is desirable as otherwise the holder of a C licence would be unable to assist another C licence holder whose vehicle was temporarily out of action. Generally speaking, however, the letting of vehicles out on hire with driver would be the prerogative of the holders of A. and B licences and could only be carried out under licences of those classes.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 9, insert the said new words. —(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved to omit paragraphs (b) and (c) in subsection (6) and insert: (b) motor vehicles from time to time in the possession of the holder of the licence under an agreement for hire or loan, not exceeding at any time such maximum number as is specified in the licence; (c) trailers from time to time belonging to the holder of the licence or in his possession under an agreement for hire purchase, hire or loan, not exceeding at any time such maximum number as is specified in the licence.

The noble Marquess said: This Amendment is little more than drafting and rearrangement. It makes clear, however, that the number of vehicles to be specified is a maximum, and it also brings in vehicles on loan as well as vehicles on hire.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 19, leave out lines 19 to 27 and insert the said new paragraphs.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved, in subsection 6 (d), after "C licence" to insert "subject to the provisions of the next succeeding subsection." The noble Marquess said: This is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 28, after ("licence") insert ("subject to the provisions of the next succeeding subsection").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved, in the proviso in subsection (6), to leave out "Provided that a motor vehicle" and insert:

"For the purposes of paragraph (b) or paragraph (c) of this subsection, different types of motor vehicles or different types of trailers, as the case may be, may be distinguished in a licence and a maximum number may be specified in the licence for vehicles or trailers of each type.

(7) A motor vehicle"

The noble Marquess said: This is a consequential Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 34, leave out ("Provided that a motor vehicle") and insert the said new words.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 35, after ("or") insert ("under a hire purchase agreement").(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 2, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 3:

Duration of licences.

3.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, the period for which a licence may be granted (in this section referred to as "the currency period") shall be—

1. (a) in the case of au A licence, two years;
2. (b) in the case of a B licence, one year;
3. (c) in the case of a C licence, three years,

from the date on which it is expressed to take effect.

(2) The Minister may prescribe the dates in the year on which licences, other than licences hereinafter referred to as short-term licences, shall expire, and a licence shall, unless previously revoked, continue in force up to and including that one of the prescribed dates which occurs next before the expiration of the currency period thereof, or up to and including such earlier date, being one of the prescribed dates, as the licensing authority may, at the time of granting the licence, for special reasons, determine.

(3) With a view to enabling goods vehicles to be used temporarily—

1. (a) for the purposes of a seasonal business;
2. (b) for the purposes of the execution of a particular piece of work;
3. (c) pending the determination of an application for the grant of a licence for the currency period; or
4. (d) for any other purpose of limited duration,

a licence (in this Part of this Act referred to as a "short-term licence") may be granted for a period less than the currency period, but not exceeding three months.

(4) If on the date of the expiration of a licence, other than a short-term licence, proceedings are pending before the licensing authority on an application by the holder of that licence for the grant to him of a new licence in substitution for the existing licence, the existing licence shall continue in force until the application is disposed of, without prejudice, however, to the exercise in the meantime of the powers of suspension and revocation conferred by this Part of this Act.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved in subsection 3 to leave out paragraph (c). The noble Marquess said:

This Amendment and the three succeeding ones are partly drafting and partly designed to assist the licensing authority to spread out the work of licensing more or less evenly throughout the year. With this object in view it is provided that on a first application for an A licence a short-term licence may be granted, pending the determination of the application, for a period not exceeding twelve months, and in the case of a B licence six months. I think your Lordships will understand that without some such provision all A licences and B licences would start from the same date and fall to be renewed at that date in succeeding years. The short-term licences envisaged in the new subsection (4) would not invalidate the claim of an applicant for an A licence or for a B licence in respect of his "standard year" tonnage on the first licence granted for the full currency period.

Amendment moved— Page 6, line 28, leave out paragraph (c).—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next two Amendments are consequential drafting Amendments.

Amendments moved—

Page 6, line 31, leave out from ("licence") to ("may") in line 32, and insert ("of any class")

Page 6, line 33, after ("months") insert ("and any licence granted under this or the next following subsection is in this Part of this Act referred to as a short-term licence'").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved, after subsection (3), to insert: (4) Where an application has been made for a licence for the currency period, the licensing authority, if for administrative reasons he deems it desirable so to do, may, pending the determination of the application, grant to the applicant a short term licence for a period not exceeding—

1. (a) in the case of a first application for an A licence, twelve months;
2. (b) in the case of a first application for a B licence, six months; and
3. (c) in any other case, three months, but any short-term licence so granted shall cease to have effect as from the date on 187 which a licence granted for the currency period is expressed to take effect."

The noble Marquess said: This Amendment deals with the same point as we have already been discussing.

Amendment moved— Page 6, line 33, at end insert the said new subsection (4).— (The Marquess of Londonderry.)

LORD ILIFFEmoved to amend the proposed Amendment by inserting at the end: "Provided that nothing in this subsection shall interfere with or affect the grant of a licence under the provisions of subsection (2) or subsection (3) of Section seven of this Act." The noble Lord said: This Amendment appears to me to conflict with subsections (2) and (3) of Clause 7, under which, on the first application within six months after the passing of the Act, applicants for A and B licences are entitled to receive their first licences for two years and one year respectively, and no objection can be made under Clause 10. In order to safeguard Clause 7 (2) and (3) I propose this Amendment.

Amendment to proposed Amendment moved—

At end insert the said proviso.— Lord Iliffe.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

I hardly think that the Amendment which the noble Lord has proposed is necessary. The object of the Amendment which I proposed is to relieve the licensing authority in a work which will be very heavy in any case; but I will promise the noble Lord that if there is a requirement for the Amendment which he has proposed, I will look into it between this stage and the next stage; and at the same time I can also assure the noble Lord that that stage will be taken very shortly.

EARL HOWE

May I ask the noble Marquess whether he can give a definite assurance that there is really nothing in the Amendment which he has proposed which is intended to vary the conditions of A and B licences? I think if we could be given an assurance to that effect, it would have a considerable effect upon the people for whom I speak.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

As far as I know, no, but I will look into that before the next stage.

Amendment to proposed Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 3, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 4:

Licensing authority 20 & 21 Geo. 5 c. 43.

4.— (1) The person who is the Chairman of the Traffic Commissioners for any traffic area within the meaning of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, and any person for the time being appointed by the Minister under subsection (7) of Section sixty-three of that Act to act as deputy to the Chairman, shall have the power and be charged with the duty of granting licences under this Part of this Act, and is in this Part of this Act referred to as "the licensing authority."

(2) This section shall have effect as respects the Metropolitan traffic area with the substitution of a reference to the Traffic Commissioner for that area for the reference to the Chairman of the Traffic Commissioners.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The Amendments to this clause are drafting.

Amendments moved—

Page 7, line 5, leave out ("and") and insert ("including")

Page 7, line 6, leave out ("under subsection (7) of Section sixty-three of that Act").— (The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 4, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 5:

Procedure on applications for licences.

5.— (1) A person applying for a licence shall submit to the licensing authority a statement in the prescribed form—

(2) A person applying for a licence shall give to the licensing authority any information which he may reasonably require for the discharge of his duties in relation to the application and, in particular, an applicant for an A licence or a B licence, shall, if required by the licensing authority, submit to the licensing authority in the prescribed form— (a) such particulars as the licensing authority may require with respect to any business as a carrier of goods for hire or reward carried on by the applicant at any time before the making of the application and of the rates charged by the applicant;

LORD DE CLIFFORD moved, in paragraph (a) of subsection (2), to leave out "and of the rates charged by the applicant." The noble Lord said: I am moving this Amendment because when I raised this point on Second Reading, the noble Earl who replied did not give me any answer. I still fail to see why the rate charged by the applicant should be laid before the Tribunal. It should be well noted that this Bill gives no power to control rates for road transport. The Attorney-General said, in the House of Commons Standing Committee, that there is no intention of prying into the future or controlling the rate to be charged in the future. I do not see why then it should be necessary for the licensing authority to acquire particulars of the rates charged. Rates are definitely excluded from the conditions of a licence in haulage business where rate cutting has been most marked. I think that road hauliers may justly fear that if this requirement is laid upon them, it may be used detrimentally to their business.

Amendment moved— Page 8, line 10, leave out ("and of the rates charged by the applicant").— (Lord Clifford.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I am afraid that I do not agree with the noble Lord. I think that it is very important that the licensing authority should have this information. In fact, I think that it is essential that he should have it in order that he may come to a conclusion as to whether or not there is a genuine demand for this particular kind of traffic in his area. It is essential for him to know that for this particular reason: it is quite possible that a fictitious demand, as it were, might have been created by the fact that particular carrier was quoting rates below those quoted by the general run of carriers in that particular district, and he might quite easily, having done that, come and say: "The demand upon me is very great and I ought to have an additional number of licences." It is perfectly clear that if an application of this kind is objected to, the objectors will make allegations of this kind if they are true, and therefore, in order to enable the licensing authority to come to a fair conclusion, I maintain that it is absolutely necessary that he should have evidence with regard to rates. I hope your Lordships will not accept this Amendment.

LORD SANDHURST

My Lords, I am afraid that the answer that has been given does not entirely convince me, because if the objectors are going to raise the question of the rates which are going to be charged, they can surely make it necessary that, in order that he shall receive his licences, the applicant shall produce the rates. If he does not agree to produce them he will be in rather the same position as the defendant in a criminal charge who does not go into the witness box and the case will be taken by default. I submit that this Amendment is clearly essential to save the perfectly honest contractor from placing his business and his business figures in the hands of his opponents.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

Clause 5 agreed to.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAMEmoved to insert the following new clause after Clause 5: No information obtained under the provisions of the foregoing section shall, unless the owner of the undertaking agrees thereto, be made public and any person who obtains any information in the exercise of the powers contained in the said section shall be required to make a declaration of secrecy in such form as may be prescribed by the Minister and any person who discloses any information so obtained by him shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds. The noble Viscount said: Under the Coal Mines Act there is a penalty provision for anybody who in the course of his official duties discloses any information so obtained by him. That, of course, is a very serious offence under the Coal Mines Act. This is not quite so serious but there is a fear amongst applicants for licences that their rates may be disclosed to their competitors. I have taken Section 8 of the Coal Mines Act as far as possible as my model, but I have not included the provision contained in that section for imprisonment. I have made it simply a matter for a fine. If competitors are advised by officials what the rates of their competitors are then I think that some provision should be put in to make it a punishable offence. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— After Clause 5. insert the said new clause — (Viscount Bertie of Thame.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The clause which my noble friend suggests requires that any information obtained under the provisions of Clause 5 of the Bill shall be kept secret, subject to a penalty for any person who discloses any information so obtained. The clause is unworkable in its present form and I think your Lordships will agree that in any ease it goes too far. The information to be supplied under subsection (1) of Clause 5 will have to be published in the proceedings of the licensing authority in order to give other operators an opportunity of lodging objections. If the scope of the new clause were limited to the information to be supplied under subsection (2) of Clause 5 there would be something to be said for it. On the other hand similar information is required to be furnished to the Traffic Commissioners by operators of public service vehicles under the provisions of Section 76 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, and no conditions as to the secret or confidential character of the information is attached in that Act. It is obviously undesirable that there shall be a difference in practice between applications on the part of operators of public service vehicles under the Act of 1930 and. applications by operators of goods vehicles under the present Bill: particularly as the Chairman of the Traffic Commissioners under the 1930 Act is the licensing authority under the present Bill.

Again, the information furnished to the licensing authority under subsection (2) of Clause 5 may be relevant to the decision reached by the authority as to the grant or refusal of a licence, or any condition that may be attached thereto. Should the licensing authority's decision form the subject of appeal, obviously the information furnished under the provisions of subsection (2) of Clause 5 would need to be made public.

My noble friend possibly has in mind the provisions of subsection (4) of Section 14 of the London Traffic Act, 1924, which requires particulars supplied to the Minister under that section to be treated as confidential except where the Minister considers that it. is in the public interest that they should be included in a Report to Parliament under the Act, or where the Minister considers that the disclosure of the same is requisite for the purposes of any inquiry under the Act or, in cases where legal proceedings are taken, for the purpose of those proceedings. It may be pointed out that the information under Section 14 is supplied to the Minister and not to the authority granting the licence. The two cases are, therefore, not parallel. I regret we are unable to accept my noble friend's Amendment.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

After the noble Marquess's very full explanation I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment. It is true that under the Road Traffic Act the provisions are not the same as these. That entirely escaped my attention.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 6:

Discretion of licensing authority as to grant or refusal of licences.

6.— (1) Subject to the provisions of the next succeeding section, the licensing au thority—

1. (a) on an application for an A licence or for a B licence, shall have full power in his discretion either to grant or to refuse the application, or to grant the application in respect of motor vehicles other than those of which particulars were contained in the application, or in respect of a less number of vehicles than that for the use of which authorisation was applied for; and
2. (b) on an application for a C licence, shall grant the application, unless the applicant is the holder of a licence which is suspended, or unless a licence previously held by him has been revoked, in either of which cases the licensing authority shall have full power in his discretion either to grant or to refuse the application.

(2) The licensing authority in exercising his discretion shall have regard primarily to the interests of the public generally, including those of persons requiring, as well Os those of persons providing, facilities for transport and, in particular, shall have regard in the case of an application for an A licence or for a B licence—

1. (a) where the applicant is the holder of an existing licence of the same class, to the extent to which he is authorised to use goods vehicles thereunder for the carriage of goods for hire or reward:
2. (b) to the previous conduct of the applicant in the capacity of a carrier of goods;
3. (c) to the number and type of vehicles proposed to be used under the licence; and, in the case of an application for a B licence, also to the extent to which the applicant intends that the vehicles proposed to be used under the licence shall be used for the carriage of goods for hire or reward.

(3) In any case in which the licensing authority refuses to grant a licence or grants a licence which differs from the licence applied for or imposes conditions to which the applicant does not agree, the licensing authority shall, if requested by the applicant, state the reasons for his decision.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The first two Amendments in my name to this clause are drafting. I beg to move

Amendments moved—

Page 9, line 11, leave out ("the application") and insert ("a licence")

Page 9, line 14, leave out ("a less number of vehicles than that") and insert ("motor vehicles or trailers less in number than, or differing in type from, those").— (The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

LORD ILIFFE

had an Amendment on the Paper to add to paragraph (a) in subsection (1) the words "but shall not refuse an application for the renewal of au existing A or B licence except on the grounds on which the licence may be suspended or revoked." The noble Lord said: This Amendment is consequential upon an Amendment I propose to move at a later stage and therefore I will not move this Amendment now.

EARL HOWE moved to insert at the end of paragraph (c) in subsection (2) "and the necessary provision for substituted vehicles on occasions when authorised vehicles are withdrawn from use for repairs." The noble Earl said: This Amendment refers to the hiring margin. The other day the point was raised in the Second heading debate, but I do not think the noble Earl who replied for the Government really dealt with the position. The position is this. Our Amendment; is designed to make provision for substituting vehicles on occasions when vehicles are withdrawn for repairs. Take the case of a man— I believe there are quite a number of such cases— who has only one or two vehicles. It is quite possible that the licensing authority will not be able to approve of a hiring margin for such a man amounting, as it would perhaps in the case of a man owning one or two vehicles, to 50 per cent. We therefore desire to try to get over this difficulty by authorising in our Amendment the use of substituted vehicles. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 9, line 38, at end insert the said words.— (Earl Howe.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I think there is undoubtedly some substance in what the noble Earl has said. Undoubtedly in practice in coming to a decision the licensing authority would take into consideration this fact, but, as there appears to be some doubt about it, if the noble Earl will move the Amendment in this form instead of his Amendment the Government will be prepared to accept it: (d) in determining the number of vehicles to be authorised, to the need for providing for occasions when vehicles are withdrawn from service for overhaul or repair. I do not know wheather the noble Earl would agree to move the Amendment that form.

EARL HOWE

Yes, I think I shall be quite prepared to accept the Amendment moved in this form and I should desire to express my thanks to the noble Earl for having found himself able to do this.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment moved— Page 9, line 38, at end insert ("(d) in determining the number of vehicles to be authorised, to the need for providing for occasions when vehicles are withdrawn from service for overhaul or repair.")— Earl Howe.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRYmoved, in subsection (3), after "state" to insert "in writing". The noble Marquess said: This Amendment provides that the reasons of the licensing authority, if required to be stated, shall be stated in writing. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 10, line 5, after ("state") insert ("in writing").— (The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 6, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 7:

Special provisions as to certain applications.

7.— (1) If, on an application for an A licence, the applicant satisfies the licensing authority that any of the authorised vehicles will be used exclusively for the purposes of a contract entered into by the applicant with a person carrying on a trade or business (not being the business of carrying or arranging for the carrying of goods) for the carriage of goods for or in connection with that trade or business during any continuous period of not less than one year, the licensing authority shall, unless he is satisfied that, having regard to the previous conduct of the applicant in the capacity of a carrier of goods, he is not a fit person to receive a licence, grant the application so far as regards those vehicles, subject to conditions for securing that those vehicles shall be used exclusively for the purposes of the contract and shall at the termination of the contract cease to be authorised vehicles unless the licensing authority on an application made to him with respect thereto otherwise directs.

(2) If, on an application for an A licence made not later than six months after the date on which Section one of this Act comes into operation, the applicant shows to the satisfaction of the licensing authority that during the year beginning on the first day of April, nineteen hundred and thirty-two, he used any goods vehicles belonging to him, or in his possession under a hire purchase agreement, mainly for the purpose of the carriage of goods for hire or reward, the licensing authority shall grant the application in respect of vehicles having an aggregate weight unladen not less than the aggregate weight unladen of any such vehicles so used by him at any one time during the said year.

(3) if, on an application for a B licence made not later than six months after the date on which Section one of this Act comes into operation, the applicant shows to the satisfaction of the licensing authority that during the year beginning on the first day of April, nineteen hundred and thirty-two, he used any goods vehicles belonging to him, or in his possession under a hire purchase agreement, partly for the purpose of the carriage of goods for hire or reward, and partly for other purposes, the licensing authority shall grant the application in respect of vehicles having an aggregate weight unladen not less than the aggregate weight unladen of any such vehicles so used by him at any one time during the said year, and shall not, in the exercise of his discretion to attach conditions to a B licence, attach to the licence any conditions which would constitute a substantial interference with the carrying on of any trade or business for the purposes of which the vehicles were used as aforesaid.

(4) A vehicle shall not be included in a computation of aggregate weight for the purposes of more than one application for a licence by the same applicant, but the applicant may elect as to the application for the purposes of which a vehicle is to be included.

LORD DE CLIFFORD moved to insert after subsection (1): (2) if on an application for an A or a B licence the applicant being a person using horse-drawn vehicles for a carrier's business satisfies the licensing authority that the licence is required in order to enable the applicant to substitute motor vehicles for horse-drawn vehicles the licensing authority shall unless he is satisfied that the applicant has used horse-drawn vehicles in order to take advantage of this provision or that having regard to the previous conduct of the applicant in the capacity of a carrier of goods he is not a fit person to receive a licence, grant to the applicant a licence to use a goods vehicle or goods vehicles of an aggregate load capacity not less than the horse-drawn vehicles for which it is proposed that the goods vehicles shall be substituted.

The noble Lord said: This Amendment provides for the case of a carrier who is now using horse-drawn vehicles but who might wish at some future date to change over to motor vehicles. Unless some provision such as the new subsection which I propose is inserted in the Bill his application would almost certainly be met by objections under Clause 10 and he might have his application refused. The Minister in another place said that this provision was unworkable for various reasons, and he gave assurances that the licensing authority would not refuse such an application. I fail to see how the Minister can give an assurance that an authority outside Parliament will not refuse a licence. The licensing authority is the one authority which has full discretion and I think licences will be refused unless some such provision as that contained in my Amendment is made. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 10, line 24, at end insert the said new subsection.—(Lord de Clifford.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I am afraid that the Government cannot accept this Amendment in its present form. I really think that in its present form it is quite unworkable, if for no other reason, because of the rate of difference in loading capacity of motor vehicles as compared with horse-drawn vehicles. At the same time I recognise that there is some substance in the contention of the noble Lord, and it is the intention of the Government to move an Amendment on Report stage to Clause 6 which will instruct the licensing authorities to have regard to the number of vehicles that an operator with horse-drawn vehicles has used hitherto. I hope that in these circumstances the noble Lord with withdraw his Amendment.

LORD DE CLIFFORD

I thank the noble Earl for his statement. Of course the licensing authority will be an expert authority and would be able— or at any rate should be able— to judge between the capacity of horse-drawn vehicles and motor vehicles. After what the noble Earl has said I ask leave to withdraw my Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved, in subsection (2), to leave out "six months after the date on which Section one of this Act comes into operation" and insert "the first day of April, nineteen hundred and thirty-four, or such later date as the Minister may appoint." The noble Marquess said: Assuming that the Bill receives Royal Assent before Parliament rises, the Government does not see any reason why preparations should not he sufficiently advanced to allow of applications being submitted before 1st April. In the event of unforeseen circumstances arising, however, it is desirable that the Minister should be able to postpone the date if necessary. beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 10, line 26, leave out from ("than") to ("the") in line 27, and insert ("the first clay of April, nineteen hundred and thirty-four, or such later date as the Minister may appoint").— (The Marquess of Londonderry.)

EARL HOWE moved to amend the proposed Amendment by substituting "June" for "April." The noble Earl said: The reason I desire to move this Amendment is that ever since this Bill was introduced, ever since the period was first talked about, a promise was definitely given to the road transport industry that they would have a period of six months from the passage of the Bill into law. Now at this very late stage the Government propose to alter this period to a lesser one. I submit that this will inflict hardship on a number of small people. It will not matter so much to the big firms in the industry. They are sufficiently well organised to get in their applications by April, but there are a number of people outside the big transport organisations, small men who are scattered about all over the country, and I really think that the Government ought to make out a better case and give more reason than they have given so far for shortening the period. I would appeal to the noble Marquess to give this point further consideration before the Report stage. If he can give an assurance of that kind it will go a long way to help.

Amendment to the proposed Amendment moved— Leave out ("April") and insert ("June").— (Earl Howe.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

I think my noble friend is under a mis- apprehension. No one will operate under a licence for some period which may be longer than is now contemplated. The Government Amendment would enable preparations to be made. No one will be required to operate under licence until a period of six months has elapsed.

On Question, Amendment to the proposed Amendment negatived.

On Question, original Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next Amendment is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 10, line 37, leave out ("him") and insert ("the applicant").— (The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

EARL HOWEmoved, in subsection (2), to leave out the last two words— "said year "— and insert "three years ending on the thirty-first day of March nineteen hundred and thirty-three." The noble Earl said: This Amendment is designed to enable figures to be taken for three years. The reason I ask your Lordships to extend the period proposed in the Bill is that, because of trade depression and trade fluctuations, one year is not a sufficiently representative time to take. A carrier whose business had suffered a temporary set-back during the period proposed would riot he fairly treated. I have a letter from a firm which I am informed is one of the oldest and best organised road haulage firms and this is how that firm would stand: based on the highest aggregate unladen weight in actual operation during the year ending 31st March, 1933, 1,206 tons; based on the two years ending 31st March, 1933, 1,300 tons; based on the three years provided in my Amendment 1,380 tons. In other words if you take two years instead of one year there would be an increase of 7¾ per cent. on the maximum tonnage, and if the period was extended another year that would mean an increase of 14½ per cent. Part of the difference between those figures is accounted for by ordinary fluctuations of trade, because in times of depression there is a reduced demand for transport services. This applies to local as well as to long distance services.

The second reason for this difference is that this particular firm has deliberately withheld replacements of certain vehicles. Their fleet contains steam vehicles of considerable unladen weight and because of the uncertainty prevailing with regard to taxation and the general regulations covering the various types of vehicles which they have in this fleet they have not replaced them. The third reason is that since the Royal Commission on Transport first began its inquiry it has been clear that the operation of road transport was likely to be subject to increased regulation. In the interim, more particularly with regard to long distance services, the industry has been disorganised. It will be seen that you might positively as the Bill stands be penalising the man who really has been doing his hest and trying to operate his fleet in the spirit we should all agree to— namely, that the drivers should have proper hours and be properly paid, and the fleet not operated so as to contravene the law as it will be under this Bill. I submit, therefore, that the Government might well take into consideration extending this period. I am sure your Lordships will have seen, from the extracts that I have read to you of a letter from a very good firm indeed, that the date mentioned in the Bill is likely to operate hardly and to their detriment, and that a three-year period would certainly give a far fairer idea of the position, having regard to the depression in trade which has had its maximum effect during the last year. It is only since March last that things have begun to get better, and it is probably since that date that this fleet, in common with other fleets in this country, may have been able to put more vehicles on the road.

Amendment moved— Page 10, line 37, leave out ("said year") and insert ("three years ending on the thirty-first day of March nineteen hundred and thirty-three.").— (Earl Howe.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I honestly do not believe that this a good Amendment, even from the point of view of the carrier in question. To begin with it would be hard enough to check claims put forward by applicants in respect of the one year ending March 31. 1933, and it would be infinitely more difficult to check claims for the three years before March 31, 1933. Again, it seems doubtful whether an alteration of this particular subsection in the sense suggested is going to help the applicant himself. If you look at the census figures you will see that they show a steady increase in the number of goods vehicles licensed in the last three years— namely, 1930, 344,600; 1931, 356,700; and 1933, 366,100. Therefore it definitely shows that in most cases applicants would be considerably worse off if the standard were spread over three years, than if it were spread over one year. In addition to that there is this condition, that if the applicant can make out a case for more vehicles, he can perfectly well be granted a licence for more vehicles by the authority.

EARL HOWE

May I ask the noble Earl whether he will give an assurance that in such cases these facts will be definitely taken into consideration? because there is considerable nervousness in the minds of people as to how they will be treated by the licensing authority. It is probably quite true that figures have gone on an ascending scale and not, as in this particular case, on a descending scale, but I would like to remind the noble Earl that this particular firm have held back because of the licensing question under this Bill, and there is also the very intense nature of the competition which has undoubtedly been building up in the last two or three years. I hope that this matter will be considered sympathetically by the licensing authority.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I feel certain that the authority will take that kind of matter into consideration in coming to a decision. There is quite definitely a bias created in favour of the operator. Clause 6 (2) (a) says: where the applicant is the holder of an existing licence of the same class, to the extent to which he is authorised to use goods vehicles thereunder for the carriage of goods for hire or reward. That is the section I meant to refer to, but I think it is perfectly clear that in coming to a decision the authority will have to take into account that kind of consideration.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next Amendment is the same as I moved just now.

Amendment moved— Page 10, line 39, leave out from ("than") to ("the") in line 40, and insert ("the first day of April, nineteen hundred and thirty-four, or such later date as the Minister may appoint").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

EARL HOWE moved, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, to leave out "April" and insert "June". The noble Earl said: I desire to move this Amendment for exactly the same reasons as I desired to move a previous Amendment on the same point, and that is that the industry has looked upon it as a definite promise of six months before applications have to be in, and now the period has been shortened. I hope the Government can give us this little concession.

Amendment to the proposed Amendment moved— Leave out ("April") and insert ("June").— (Earl Howe.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

I think the noble Earl must be under a misunderstanding as to what I have said. No licence would come into operation for a period of at least six months. The month of April was adopted to give an opportunity for applications to come in before that date, and I think the noble Lord need be under no apprehension that licences will be in operation for a period of at least six months from now, as they were promised.

On Question, Amendment to the Amendment negatived.

On Question, original Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

My next Amendment is drafting.

Amendment moved— Page 11, line 6, leave out ("him") and inert ("the applicant").— (The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD ILIFFE moved to insert after subsection (4): (5) If on objection being made to an application for the renewal of an existing licence the licensing authority refuses to grant the renewal of the licence or imposes mw conditions on the grant of the licence and the applicant proves to the Appeal Tribunal that the refusal of the new conditions will reduce the value of the business for which he intended to use the vehicle the Appeal Tribunal shall award to the applicant such an amount of compensation as shall appear to the Tribunal to be just in all the circumstances and such compensation shall be paid to the applicant by the party or parties who made objection to the application and if there is more than one such party the amount of the compensa- tion shall be paid by them in such proportions as the Tribunal may determine.

The noble Lord said: The object of this Amendment is to prevent the licensing authority from taking away an existing licence from a carrier who has broken no condition attached to it, unless compensation is provided. As the Government have recognised the right of an existing person operating a road haulage business to a licence for a period of two years, I submit that that right should be continued indefinitely and not taken away from a holder, provided he has obeyed all the conditions of the licence. Alternatively, if it be decided that a haulier's business should be sacrificed in the national interests, or in the interests of his competitors, then he should be compensated for having to give up his property. If it is an injustice, to-day, to refuse to grant licences to enable an existing business to be carried on, why is it not an injustice still if postponed for two years? If it is an injustice to-day, it is an injustice in two years time.

I understand that the Minister in another place stated that he was anxious not to create a vested interest. Is the granting of a licence a thing of value? Obviously it is, and particularly is this so when one remembers that one of the reasons for this Bill is to regulate business and prevent a throat-cutting competition. If a licence is refused the licensee is deprived of something of value, and unless he has done something to deserve that his licence Should be revoked I am sure your Lordships will agree that he should be compensated. The compensation, I submit, should be paid by his competitors, the people who directly benefit by that licence being revoked. I have great faith in the Ministry of Transport and in the Minister of Transport, and I do not believe in practice that they will refuse a licence on the ground of redundancy unless they have the right to grant compensation to the licensee whose licence has been refused. Unless a provision to that effect is made in this Bill the power to prevent competition will vanish. We have many instances in other legislation of the necessity for providing compensation when a licence is taken away. You have the case of public-house licences. If it is considered in the interests of the public as a whole that a licence should be taken away the licensee is compensated out of the fund provided by the trade, and in my opinion, in order to make this Bill a workable Act, the Minister of Transport should reserve to himself the right to make the refusal of a licence depend upon adequate compensation being forthcoming in cases where the licensee himself has carried out all his obligations.

Amendment moved— Page 11, line 17, at end insert the said subsection.—(Lord Iliffe.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I am afraid I cannot agree with the noble Lord. I really do not think this proposal is a very reasonable one, and it is certainly contrary to the expressed intention of the Bill. The result would be that the licensing authority would have no power to take into consideration the question of demand and redundancy in coming to a decision as to what licences he should grant and to what extent he should grant licences. Furthermore, as the noble Lord says, the effect of this Amendment would virtually be to create a freehold for existing operators. Clause 18, on the other hand, says: It is hereby declared that nothing in this part of this Act is to be treated as conferring on the holder of a licence any right to the continuance of any benefits arising from the provisions of this Part of this Act, or from a licence, or from any conditions attached to a licence. The same kind of situation clearly arose in connection with passenger service vehicles in the Road Traffic Act, and no provision was made in the Road Traffic Act for the payment of compensation in cases where the operators were not allowed to continue on certain routes. In those circumstances, I hope that your Lordships will not accept this Amendment.

LORD ILIFFE

I am afraid the reply of the noble Earl does not really satisfy me. He cites the case of the passenger service vehicles. I think it is public knowledge that there have been many corn-plaints about the hardships which have arisen in the case of passenger service vehicles through licences being removed without compensation. I am most anxious that this Bill shall be workable, and I cannot believe that these licences will be withdrawn on the ground of redundancy unless the licensee obtains some compensation from those who benefit by the fact that his particular licence is revoked. I feel that this Bill will not be workable unless the Minister is able to look freely into this question of redundancy and to reduce licences where they are unnecessary. He will never do that unless he feels that he can he fair to the person whose licence is taken away, and can grant that person some compensation. If the Government are not willing to accept this Amendment now I hope they will reconsider the matter and produce an Amendment on the Report stage.

EARL HOWE

I do not consider that the reply of the Minister is adequate. I fail to see that two wrongs make a right Here you are possibly going to take away a man's livelihood— not only the livelihood of the owner of the vehicle but also that of a number of his employees. There are analogies for compensation in such cases. There is the analogy already alluded to by Lord Iliffe, whereby the licensed trade compensates the licences extinguished. I do not think we are asking a great deal of the Minister. There should be some system for giving compensation for the revocation of licences. I cannot see why a man has not some right to continue to exist. You suddenly take his livelihood away. Are we really to tell him: "That is all right. Although you have conducted your business perfectly satisfactorily, you have no right to compensation because, if you had, we might thereby be recognising some freehold"? Surely we are not asking a great deal in urging some further reconsideration of this point.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I know that the Minister has given this matter very careful consideration indeed. I feel certain he will consider the representations which have been made here to-day, but I am certainly not in a position, in view of what I have said, to hold out any great hope that he will reverse the decision he has come to.

EARL HOWE

I shall put the Amendment down again on the Report stage, and I shall hope to press it somewhat further.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 7, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 8:

Conditions of licences.

8.— (1) It shall be a condition of every licence

1. (a) that the authorised vehicles are maintained in a fit and serviceable condition;
205
2. (b) that any provisions (whether contained in any statute or in any statutory rules or orders) with respect to limits of speed and weight, laden and unladen, and the loading of goods vehicles are complied with in relation to the authorised vehicles,
3. (c) that in relation to the authorised vehicles the requirements specified in Section nineteen of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, with respect to the time for which drivers of certain vehicles may remain continuously on duty are observed;
4. (d) that the provisions of tilts Part of this Act relating to the keeping of records are complied with.

(2) It shall be a condition of every A licorice and of every B licence that the provisions of Section ninety-three of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, as amended and applied by this Part of this Act, are complied with in relation to the persons to whom that section is so applied.

(3) Subject to the provisions of subsection (3) of the last preceding section the licensing authority may in his discretion attach to a B licence, as respects the user of the authorised vehicles, or any of them, for the carriage of goods for hire or reward, all or any of the following conditions, that is to say—

1. (a) a condition that they shall be so used only in a specified district;
2. (b) a condition that certain classes or descriptions of goods only shall be so carried;
3. (c) a condition that goods shall be so carried only for specified persons;
4. (d) such other conditions (not being conditions with respect to the rates to be charged) as the licensing authority may think fit to impose in the public interest and with a view to preventing uneconomic competition.

(4) The licensing authority may, from time to time, on the application of the holder of the licence cancel or vary any conditions attached to a B licence in pursuance of subsection (3) of this section.

(5) If any person fails to comply with any condition attached to a licence, he shall be guilty of an offence under this Part of this Act.

THE LORD CHAIRMAN

I understand that the noble Viscount, Lord Cecil of Chelwood, will move an Amendment he has down on the Paper to this clause, with reference to the provision of a speedometer, on the Report stage.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next two Amendments are drafting.

Amendments moved—

Page 11, line 29, after ("1930") insert (" (as varied or amended by any order under that section or by this Act or any subsequent enactment)")

Page 11, line 31, after ("duty") insert ("and the hours which they are to have for rest").— (The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

THE EARL OF KINNOULL moved, in subsection (2), to leave out "A licence and of every B." The noble Earl said: The object of this Amendment is to extend the fair wages clause to the C-class licences. The Road Traffic Act, 1920, provides certain machinery which makes it possible to apply the fair wages clause to the licences issued to the passenger road services, and the present Bill in effect applies that machinery to the road haulage of goods. The holders of the A and B licences to be issued under this Bill are so covered. A recommendation of the Salter Report says that hauliers and ancillary users should be subject to regulations enforced through the grant of licences as regards fair wages and conditions of service and the maintenance of their vehicles in a state of fitness, and Mr. Stanley, on the Report stage in another place, said; From theoretical considerations I should like to have seen the C-class licence holders made subject to this fair-wage provision.

I think the only explanation given was that it was not a practical proposition, owing to the diversity of the undertakings and the conditions of employment.

An estimate was given on the Second Reading of the Bill in your Lordships' house to the effect that the proportion of goods haulage which will be covered by C licences is about 75 per cent. Therefore the very great majority of the work-people in this industry are directly affected by the decision on this matter. The number of people so affected has been estimated at a quarter of a million, but I think it is probably more likely 300,000. The assumption is that it is generally admitted that for 25 per cent. of the industry the existing machinery for the making of trade union agreements is sufficient and that this part of the industry should follow those agreements, but that it is not admitted that for the remaining 75 per cent. these agreements are suitable nor can they be applied, nor is it possible to utilise any other form of machinery which may be in existence.

First of all I can assert that as a matter of fact there is not the slightest difference in the work of drivers employed by general hauliers and a great proportion of those employed by ancillary users. General hauliers frequently contract to supply vehicles in large fleets or singly to firms who are ancillary users. The employees of the general hauliers will be working alongside the employees of the ancillary users, doing precisely the same work. General hauliers sometimes contract to supply all the vehicles required by a certain undertaking while another undertaking in the same industry will decide for reasons of its own to run its own vehicles. Again, in both instances the employment will be the same, but the conditions of the licences under which the vehicles run will not be. The prospect of cheap labour will induce traders to cease placing contracts with proper haulage contractors and to secure their own fleets. This will not make any difference in the nature of the employment of the drivers— it will merely mean that their wages and conditions may be worsened. Secondly, I have to point out that some of the heaviest and most difficult of vehicles on the road will come within the category of C licences. They are the kind of vehicles that require the most careful and skilled management, and yet it is proposed not to ensure that the drivers are properly paid. The vehicles coming within this category are used in the following trades: Iron and steel, ballast, building, constructional engineering, cement, sand and gravel, quarrying. Other trades using heavy vehicles include: Paper, furniture, petrol and oil distribution, meat (wholesale), milk (wholesale), provisions (wholesale). In all these cases the drivers are fully employed on, or in connection with, their vehicles and their work is very similar to that of the men employed in general haulage.

We are of the opinion that these, together with many other and similar industries, will account for the greater proportion of the drivers of vehicles for which C licences will be granted. The English and Scottish C.W.S. alone have over 800 such vehicles, and admit that their drivers are fully engaged in work in connection therewith. Even in the retail trades there are very large fleets of vehicles owned by the large stores apart from the Co-operative Stores, and in all these cases the men are fully employed as drivers. With regard to the small owner the Labour Party has already indicated its willingness to exclude from the operation of the proposal the owners of three vehicles or less. That, or a similar concession, is quite sufficient to meet the difficult cases, except that a provision might be made for larger owners requiring exemption to be given the right of appeal. Such cases could be dealt with on merits by a special voluntary tribunal set up for the purpose by the Minister.

Thirdly, there is the question of practicability. The appropriate clause in the Bill, which is Clause 27, gives to the Industrial Court instruction to "have regard to any determination which may be brought to its notice relating to the wages or conditions of service of persons employed in a capacity similar to that of the persons to whom the reference relates," having already been decided either by a joint industrial council, conciliation board, or other similar bodies, or in an agreement between employers and a trade union. There is no instruction to the Industrial Court that they should have regard only to the wages operating in the haulage industry. I think it is well known that inquiries have shown that in all the main industries in which transport is used as ancillary there are agreements governing the wages and conditions of transport workers. Instances of many such industries have been given during discussions on Committee and in the House. The Minister on Report stage referred to the Federation of Iron and Steel Manufacturers as being one of the sections of employers who have claimed that it is impossible to apply the conditions to them, yet in Committee Mr. Lewis Jones, speaking for the same industry, said: "No industry in the country has a better system of conciliation and wages conditions," clearly indicating that the machinery is there and ready to be used by the Industrial Court as required. The Minister also referred to the Engineering Federation, the Gas Employers' Federation, the Mining Association, the Shipbuilders' Employers' Federation, and the Wool Textile Employers' Federation. In all these industries there are trade union agreements, and it would not be difficult to find a fair basis for transport workers in those industries if they are not already provided for. The same can be said of all the heavy industries, manufacturers and wholesalers.

The retail distributive trade has been quoted as being the most difficult of all. Here again there are agreements, however. All the co-operative societies are so covered, and so are the London retail stores. Even if it were admitted that some drivers employed by smaller shops or even by larger concerns spend only part of the time upon the vehicle, in the interests of public safety some control is necessary. To work a full day in a shop or a warehouse and then to take a lorry to market indicates a working day longer than the normal. Section 19 of the Road Traffic Act does not apply here because the work is not "in connection with the vehicle," and yet a very fatigued man can take a vehicle on a road. The only way to control this is by trade union agreement, or the observance of Section 93 of the Road Traffic Act. I beg to move.

Amendment moved. Page 11, line 36, leave out ("A licence and of every B").—(The Earl of Kinnoull.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The effect of this Amendment would be to extend the application of the condition as to fair wages and conditions of employment to the holders of C licences as well as to the holders of A licences and B licences. A similar Amendment was moved in Committee and on Report stage in the other place, and on each occasion was withdrawn. At the close of the discussion of the Amendment on Report the Minister of Transport gave an under taking that he would take an early opportunity of discussing the whole question with the representatives of the trade unions concerned and carefully consider their views and representations. The Leader of the Opposition stated that, if the Minister was prepared to meet the unions with a perfectly open mind and re-discuss the matter with them, he would on behalf of his friends ask leave to withdraw the Amendment. The Minister has since met representatives of the unions, but their arguments have not overcome what he regards as insuperable practical difficulties to the application of the fair wages conditions to the holders of C licences.

The noble Earl who has moved this Amendment assumed that a C licence holder will run a grave risk of not being paid proper wages, but I hardly think that that is likely to happen. When I moved the Second Reading of this Bill I endeavoured to put before your Lordships the reason why, while agreeing to the fair wages clause for A and B licences, we were of opinion it should not be applied to the holders of C licences, and my noble friend in winding up the debate said it was the intention of the Minister for Labour to consult with the various organisations of employers and workpeople with a view to the establishment of a joint voluntary body or bodies which would have as their object the settlement of proper working conditions. It may seem illogical that the clause has been m de to apply to the holders of A and B licences and has been withheld from the C licence holder, but your Lordships will, I think, agree that the conditions which govern these classes are really f a totally different character. As you Lordships are aware, the whole conditions of labour wages in this country are based on voluntary arrangements which are, if I may use the expression, more or less satisfactory— certainly more than less. The fair wages provision brings in an element of compulsion which I do not feel is necessary on this occasion, and also I am of opinion that it will interfere to a certain extent with the working of the other conditions under which wages are determined. That is the view the Government are taking, and it seems to present a difficulty to have one portion by fixed arrangement and the other governed by voluntary and elastic conditions.

With regard to those holding C licences, it may be that the transport portion of those industries to which they belong will only represent a certain portion and perhaps a very small portion of the working day, and I think that your Lordships will understand that grave difficulties must arise if for that portion of the industry which relates to transport, the fair wages conditions should operate, while during the remaining portion of the day for which that operative is employed the conditions are of a totally different character. It does seem to the Government that in these circumstances it is far better to adopt the policy which they have put forward; that is to say, to accept the fair wages conditions for the A and B licences, but to leave the C licences outside the scope of this provision.

The noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition raised this question on Second Reading, and I understand that I was not able to convince him by the arguments which I put forward; but I hope that he will take into consideration the very grave difficulties which must arise through the complexities of the situation connected with the holders of C licences from that point of view which I have endeavoured to put forward— that the transport work which a workman might have to undertake would be, or might be, only a very small portion of his operation in the week, and under the fair wages clause lie would be entitled to receive remuneration as if that remuneration were connected with his transport connection; and in relation to the other industries, those matters are dealt with by the trade unions belonging to those industries; and it seems to me that that is an operation with which we do not want to interfere. In fact I think the industries themselves would object to any inroad being made into the jurisdiction which they hold at the present moment. In the circumstances the Government feel that they cannot accept the Amendment which has been moved.

LORD PONSONBY OF SHULBREDE

I must confess that we on this side of the House are very disappointed at the announcement which has just been made by the noble Marquess. We had hoped that in the interval between Second Reading and the Committee stage the Minister of Transport would have had an opportunity of reconsidering the matter and coming to a different conclusion from the one at which he had arrived. It happens that this is a matter of considerable importance, because it applies to such a very large number of the people affected by this Bill. I gather both from what the noble Marquess had said and from what was said by the Minister of Transport in another place, that in principle they are in favour of the fair wages resolution being applied, if possible, and that their excuse for not adopting it is its impracticability.

I have listened very carefully to the noble Marquess to hear what it was that made it so impracticable, and I must confess that I did not hear any real argument. Here we have workers on work about which there is no distinction whatsoever, workers doing precisely the same sort of work, and yet a discrimination is made between them in the conditions of their employment. That seems to me to be an anomaly which ought not to be allowed to appear in this Bill. The noble Marquess said that in some cases they might be employed upon haulage for a very small proportion of their time; but in other cases they might be employed upon it for nearly the whole of their time, and I do not see why you should pick out one small difficulty. My noble friend Lord Kinnoull, I think, showed in his remarks directions in which some adjustment could be made, and that a scheme could be devised which would be quite practicable. I do not want to detain the Committee, but I am afraid that we shall have to register our protest on this particular Amendment by dividing your Lordships.

EARL BUXTON

I was responsible for the original fair wages resolution when, nearly forty years ago, it was passed in the House of Commons and in your Lordships' House, and I therefore look with considerable jealousy on anything which may tend to diminish the effective application of that resolution. The resolution was originally introduced in order to ensure that in Government contracts employers should pay the recognised rates of wages. It was found on many occasions that when applying for Government contracts a cut was made in the labour bill in order to give a footing to a lower estimate than that put in by other persons with whom the tenderer was competing, and that clause was adopted and became a resolution as regards Government contracts; and I am glad to believe that it has been recognised by public bodies all over the country, and also voluntarily by a very large number of employers.

I confess that I listened with some fear to what fell from the noble Marquess. The position is a very complicated one; that I entirely admit. It is difficult, and there are difficulties on both sides. As I understand, the fair wages clause, which is designed to obtain a fair rate of wages for the men, is to be enforced in the case of the A and B classes, but in class C it is not to be applied; and yet I believe— so it was stated, and not, I think, contradicted by the noble Marquess— no less than 70 per cent. of the men in question belong to Class C. It does appear to me that if the fair wages clause is to be put into force for the two smaller classes, which represent only some 30 per cent. of the men affected, as I understand, it ought to be applied equally in the case of the other 70 per cent.

An appeal was made to the difficulties of the case. As I understand the noble Marquess, the difficulties are two-fold; in the first place, that some employers are not employing very large numbers of men and it might be difficult to say what is the fair wage in that case; and secondly, that in some cases the men are employed for only half of their time upon the particular work affected by the fair wages clause and are on other work at other times. As regards the first case, I do not see where the difficulty arises, because if there is a recognised rate of wage for these men and it can be put into force in the case of A and B licences, therefore if any employer pays his Class C men below that recognised rate he will be under-cutting labour and will be sweating his men. It will be easy enough to ascertain what is the fair rate of wages even in the case of a few men, as it is recognised already by the trade as a whole that there is a rate which is to be applied to the other two classes.

I admit the difficulty as to the man who is doing this work for part of his time and for the remainder of his time is doing other work. That, I admit, has to be considered; but I also think that the noble Marquess did not quite recognise what fell from the noble Earl who moved this Amendment— namely, that he is quite prepared to exclude from its operation the smaller employers, those who are employing only a few men, in whose case there may be some difficulty in ascertaining whether they are paying the fair rate of wage. I think the bulk of those companies and firms who come under Class C are large organisations employing many hundreds of men, with whom there would be no difficulty in ascertaining what the fair wage would be, and it is very unfair to my mind that that should not be applied to them equally with the other two classes. The noble Marquess, I understand, suggests that the matter could stand over until we see by experience how it works out, and he objected to it in regard to Cass C. I accept that, not as a satisfactory answer, but as an indication, at all events, that the Minister of Transport and his representative here do see that there is a considerable amount of possible injustice in regard to this matter. I do not know that it is something calling for a Division. I recognise the difficulty, and I think the noble Earl who moved this Amendment must be satisfied that it is now recognised that his point is one which deserves to be raised in your Lordships' House, and one in regard to which we can perhaps hope that on Report stage we may get the Government to go further than they have agreed to do so far.

LORD ASKWITH

I should like to say a word in support of what the noble Earl has just said. He has talked about the working of the fair wages clause in other industries. I was Chairman of the Fair Wages Advisory Committee for eight years and we had a great many of these cases coining before us. I can assure your Lordships, from experience, and from knowledge of what I saw, that the clause worked without great difficulty, and that it caused, by its being worked, a great reduction of unrest and trouble that might otherwise have arisen. I think it was a very good thing indeed. If the noble Marquess would take into further consideration whether more thought could be given to this matter, I should be glad if your Lordships could feel you had taken some steps to reduce the amount of unrest and trouble which so frequently arises through the non-application of the fair wages clause.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

I cannot possibly be insensible to the remarks which have fallen from my noble friend who sits behind me (Lord Askwith). He has asked if it were possible for the Government to give fuller consideration to this matter. Your Lordships are well aware that the time at our disposal is now very short, and that, instead of having, as is customary, many days to consider this matter we have to face the fact that Parliament rises on Friday, and that the Report stage will naturally have to be taken in a very short space of time. The speeches which have been made by my noble friends show that there is a desire (shall I put it?) on the part of the noble Earl who sits opposite to divide in favour of his Amendment, and on the part of my noble friends of suggesting that we might consider this matter more fully. No one, speaks with greater authority than the noble Lord who sits behind me. He perhaps has had more experience and has more knowledge of labour matters almost than any one in this country, and when he makes a suggestion of the kind he has made it is one that naturally must be fully considered, but I would venture to put before him the reasons which have already been stated in your Lordships' House.

It is quite true that the holders of C licences will constitute a very large percentage of the licensees; indeed they will be more than the number of those who are holding A and B licences, but I think your Lordships will also agree that in the circumstances the C licence holders do find themselves in a totally different condition from the conditions which operate in the case of the holders of A and B licences. The conditions under which A and B licence holders operate only exist to a very small extent in the case of the greater number of those who hold C licences. In the road haulage industry proper the transport workers constitute the principal grade of work-people employed, but as to the industries whose workers will be holding the C licences, it is impossible for me to give actual figures, because I have not them in my possession. I think it will be found that the conditions to which I have made reference will govern the workpeople in question. I think that when the provisions come to be put into operation it will be found that there will be so many restrictions and so many exceptions, that many of the conditions will produce anomalies which could hardly he removed unless the fair wages provision was so hedged about with exceptions and qualifications that it would be almost impossible to enforce and practically useless as a protection.

Words to that effect were used during the Second Reading debate, and I am given to understand from those who advise me, and on whose behalf I am putting this Bill before your Lordships, that this is a factor of the greatest importance, and that, notwithstanding their desire to carry out all these provisions and all those intentions which are in the minds of my noble friend who sits behind me and of the noble Earl (Lord Buxton), and of the noble Earl who sits opposite, the difficulties would be so great that the conditions which my noble friends have asked for could not be given effect to at, this moment. I would remind your Lordships of what was said in the speech of my noble friend Lord Plymouth in winding up this debate, and that was that there was a desire on the part of the employers organisations and work-people to come together and discuss these very points. I feel when these matters can be discussed, as they will be discussed at no very distant date, we shall have then a much clearer view as to whether the proposition which is contained in this Amendment is best for all concerned, or whether the suggestions which come from the Ministry of Transport and are contained in this Bill are best suited to the "C" case as it appears to us at this moment.

THE MARQUESS OF READING

I confess after listening to the noble Marquess I still find it difficult to understand why it should be so complicated a matter to draw a distinction between licence holders A and B and licence holders C. When he made the statement on Second Reading it seemed to me there were such complications that it, was impossible to give effect to what is desired, and I was rather inclined to accept that view from him, because I know these matters have to be enquired into by the civil servants whose business it is to give their time and attention to them. I cannot understand now, however, why there should be this complication, particularly after what has been said by the noble Earl who moved this Amendment. He was quite prepared to agree that exceptions should be made in the case of the small trader. It seems a little difficult for your Lordships now to make the exception when you are dealing with the users of the road in all the three classes. You have men working very much the same hours and under the same conditions, and I am quite unable to understand why there should be any complication. If there are any special difficulties they can be met. One does look for some reason why you should draw a distinction respecting the fairness of a rate of wage. The noble Earl, Lord Buxton, had much to do with the introduction of the fair wages clause, and it has been followed throughout the country for a great number of years. Why is there now this complication which makes it impossible to apply it equally to licences A and B and C? I would appeal to my noble friend at this moment, notwithstanding the lateness of the stage, to consider whether there may not be some way of meeting this difficulty, though he may not go the whole way. I am both to have to vote against him in a Division on this particular measure, but so far I confess I do not understand why there

Resolved in the affirmative, and Amendment disagreed to accordingly.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next two Amendments on the Paper are drafting Amendments. I beg to move.

Amendments moved—

Page 11, line 40, leave out line 40 and insert ("the authorised vehicles").

Page 12, line 5, at end, insert ("or between specified places").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved to leave out subsection (5). The noble Marquess said: This subsection,

Should be a difference between A and B and C licence holders.

On Question, Whether the words "A licence and of every B" shall stand part of the clause?

Their Lordships divided:—Contents, 65; Not-Contents, 29.

CONTENTS.
Sankey, V. (L. Chancellor.)	Wicklow, E.	Greville, L.
		Harris, L.
Wellington, D.	Astor, V.	Hawke, L.
	Chaplin, V.	Heneage, L.
Oamden, M.	Churchill, V.	Howard of Glossop, L.
Zetland, M.	Cobham, V.	Hutchison of Montrose, L.
	FitzAlan of Derwent, V.	lliffe, L.
Albemarle, E.	Goschen, V.	Irwin, L.
Balfour, E.	Hailsham, V.	Kinnaird, L.
Derby, E.	Hutchinson, V. (E. Donough-more.)	Lamington, L.
Bowe, E.		Luke, L.
lddesleigh, E.	Knutsford, V.	Marks, L.
Leven and Melville, E.		Meldrum, L. (M. Huntly.)
Lucan, E. [Teller.]	Alvingham, L.	Merthyr, L.
Malmesbury, E.	Barnard, L.	Oriel, L. (V. Massereene.)
Midleton, E.	Butler of Mount Juliet, L. (E. Carrick.)	Ormonde, L. (M. Ormonde.)
Morton, E.		Palmer, L.
Mount Edgcumbe, E.	Carrington, L.	Rankeillour, L.
Munster, E. [Teller.]	Ohesham, L.	Remnant, L.
Onslow, E.	Cottesloe, L.	Rennell, L.
Plymouth, E.	Danesfort, L.	Rochester, L.
Radnor, E.	Fairfax of Cameron, L.	Selsdon, L.
Stanhope, E.	Faringdon, L.	Strathcona and Mount Royal, L.
Vane, E. (M. Londonderry.)	Gage, L. (V. Gage.)
		Wigan, L. (E. Crawford.)

NOT-CONTENTS.
Reading, M.	Conway of Allington, L.	Mendip, L. (V. Clifden.)
	Cozens-Hardy, L.	O'Hagan, L.
Buxton, E.	Darling, L.	Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L.
Strafford, E.	de Clifford, L.	Rathcreedan, L.
	Gainford, L.	Rhayader, L.
Bertie of Thame, V.	Gladstone of Hawarden, L.	Russell of Liverpool, L.
	Hay, L. (E. Kinnoull.) [Teller.]	Sanderson, L.
Addington, L.		Sandhurst, L.
Amulree, L.	Jessel, L.	Snell, L. [Teller.]
Askwith, L.	Mamhead, L.	Stanley of Alderley, L. (L. Sheffield.)
Brougham and Vaux, L.	Melehett, L.
		Swavthling, L.

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

which deals with the penalty attaching to non-observance of the conditions attached to a licence, now appears in the new clause put down by the Government to follow immediately after Clause 8. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 12, line 19, leave out subsection (5).—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF CRAWFORD

On the Question that Clause 8 stand part of the Bill, I should like to refer for a minute or two to the duties and powers conferred upon the Traffic Commissioners. They are so far-reaching in character and extent that I think it is worth while summarising them to your Lordships. In the first place they have to see that every vehicle is in a serviceable condition and to continue to see that it shall he in that condition. They have to see that every rule relating to speed, to weight, and to the method of loading is complied with. That also is a continuing duty. They have, moreover, to ensure that the hours of duty are observed and that adequate records are kept—also a continuing duty. Each Traffic Commission consists of two gentlemen, one of whom is a nominee of the Government. As regards licences their powers are as follows: They can say that a vehicle shall not work except in a specified district, and, according to the Amendment just put in, between specified places. Secondly, they can control the class and the description of the goods carried in every vehicle of this description. Thirdly, they can limit the carriage of goods to specified persons. Finally, they can impose any other conditions they think fit, so long as it does not refer to the rates charged. I can imagine nothing more calculated to impair the mobility and fluidity of the vehicular traffic than those powers and duties conferred upon this large number of Traffic Commissioners, scattered all over the country.

Your Lordships may recall what happened a few years ago, when there was a great dislocation of railway traffic and recourse was had to the motor traffic, and many of your Lordships, I dare say, saw the central parks of this Metropolis occupied by hundreds and thousands of motor cars, which were carrying milk to London. The freedom with which those vehicles were allowed to operate in the milk traffic, and the ease with which they could move from their normal traffic to this traffic, was such that the health and security of London were maintained. Now, supposing we have got Commissioners who do not think that those things should be permitted during a strike, and that the Commissioners of Wiltshire or Buckinghamshire or Hertfordshire may say that these cars are not licenced to carry milk or coal, or whatever it may be, and shall not work between their area and London; and, finally, that they shall only carry goods for specified persons, which, of course, is incompatible with the general needs during a crisis such as occurred a few years ago—I venture to say that those gentlemen can paralyse the food supplies of London, or of any other area, if they are minded to do so. I suppose your Lordships desire this power to be conferred upon these gentlemen. For my part I think it would be extremely dangerous, and those who were concerned in that crisis a few years ago do not need any assurance that at that time there were persons of very high authority who were anxious that the crisis should not be solved. All I can say is that if those persons concerned should be nominees of the Government the danger may be such as in particular circumstances might prove to be disastrous.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

We have listened to the speech which has fallen from the noble Earl, and if I may venture to say so I think you will agree with me, and so also will the noble Earl, that that speech would have found better place on the Second Reading of the Bill, because, in the speech which he has delivered, the noble Earl has really called into question the whole principle on which the Bill is founded. As to what the noble Earl has said with reference to licensing authorities, those are the conditions which the licensing authorities may impose, but those conditions will have to be carried out by the police and other officers appointed under the Bill. With regard to the second part of his speech, in which he is under the impression that the provisions of this Bill may further paralyse the life of the country, I think all those difficulties which he has enumerated can be dealt with under the Emergency Powers Act, which could be called into being if such a situation arose. I do not feel, after the debate which we have already had on this Bill, that I can usefully add anything to what I have already said on the Second Reading of this Bill.

Clause 8, as amended, agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved to insert the following new clause after Clause 8:

Penalty for non-compliance with and exception from conditions of licences.

".—(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, any person who fails to comply with any condition of a licence held by him, shall be guilty of an offence under this Part of this Act.

(2) Notwithstanding that a vehicle is an authorised vehicle, the conditions of the licence shall not apply while the vehicle is being used for any purpose for which it might lawfully he used without the authority id a licence."

The noble Marquess said: This new clause is largely a matter of redrafting and rearrangement. The first subsection of the new clause is in effect a reproduction of subsection (5) of Clause 8. By a previous Amendment that subsection has been struck out of the clause. Subsection (2) of the new clause is required to make it clear that the conditions of a licence shall not apply while an authorised vehicle is being used for any of the exempted purposes set out in subsection (5) of Clause 1.

Amendment moved— After Clause 8, insert the said new Clause.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 9:

Variation of licences.

9.—(1) On the application of the holder of a licence, the licensing authority by whom the licence was granted may at any time during its currency vary the licence by directing that additional vehicles shall be specified therein or that vehicles specified therein shall be removed therefrom, or that the number of motor vehicles or of trailers specified in the licence in pursuance of paragraphs (b) and (c) respectively of subsection (6) of Section two of this Act shall be increased or reduced.

(2) The foregoing provisions of this Part of this Act as to applications for licences of any class (except provisions as to the licensing authority to whom applications are to be made), as to the grant or refusal of licences of any class (except the provisions of subsections (2), (5) and (4) of Section seven), and as to the attaching of conditions to B licences shall apply in relation to the variation of a licence of that class:

Provided that the licensing authority shall be bound to grant an application for a variation consisting only of the removal of a specified vehicle from the licence, or of a reduction in the number specified as aforesaid or of the specification in the licence in substitution for a specified vehicle of a vehicle of the same or of a less weight unladen.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The Amendments to this clause are drafting Amendments.

Amendments moved—

page 12, line 27, after ("the") insert ("maximum").

Page 13, line 1, after the first ("the") insert ("maximum").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

Clause 9, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 10:

Objections to certain applications for licences or variations o f licences.

10.—(1) The licensing authority shall publish in the prescribed manner notice of an application to which this section applies specifying the dine within which, and the manner in which, objections may be made to the grant of the application.

(2) It shall be the duty of the licensing authority, on an application to which this section applies, to take into consideration any objections to the application which may be made by persons who are already providing facilities, whether by means of road transport or any other kind of transport, for the carriage of goods for hire or reward in the district, or between the places which the applicant intends to serve, on the ground that suitable transport facilities in that district, or between those places are or, if the application were granted, would be, either generally or in respect of any particular type of vehicles, in excess of requirements, or on the ground that any of the conditions attached to a licence held by the applicant has not been complied with:

Provided that on an application for the grant or variation of an A licence, the licensing authority shall not be bound to take into consideration objections made by a person who holds a B licence and does not also hold an A licence.

(3) This section shall apply to every application for the grant of an A licence or a B licence, or for the variation of such a licence by a direction' that additional vehicles shall be specified therein or that the number of motor vehicles or of trailers specified in the licence in pursuance of paragraphs (b) and (c) respectively of subsection (6) of Section two of this Act shall be increased or in the case of a B licence that the district specified in the licence within, which the vehicles can be used for the carriage of goods for hire or reward should be varied or extended, not being—

1. (a) an application which the licensing authority is bound to grant; or
2. (b) an application for a licence to expire not later than an existing licence under which the vehicles to which the application relates are authorised to be used for the purposes of a business which the applicant has acquired or intends to acquire;
3. (c) an application as respects which 4-he licensing authority is of 'opinion that, having regard to its trivial character it is not necessary that any opportunity should be given for objection;

and to every application for a short-term licence, unless the applicant satisfies the licensing authority that the application for the licence has been made with reasonable expedition and that the demand for the use of the vehicles to be authorised under the licence is so urgent as to render compliance with the requirements of this section impracticable, or unless the application is for a short-term licence pending the determina- tion of an application for the grant of a licence for the currency period.

(4) The licensing authority may hold such inquiries as he thinks necessary for the proper exercise of his functions under this Act.

(5) Where on an application for the grant of an A licence or a B licence, the licensing authority proposes to grant the application in respect of vehicles other than those of which particulars were contained in the application, he shall publish notice of his proposal as if that proposal were an application to which this section applies, and thereupon the provisions of this section with respect to the making and consideration of objections shall apply accordingly:

Provided that it shall not be necessary for the licensing authority to publish such a notice if he is satisfied that the variation, subject to which he proposes to grant the application, will not materially increase the total carrying capacity of the vehicles to be specified in the licence.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next three Amendments are drafting.

Amendments moved—

Page 13, line 35, leave out ("attached to") and insert ("of").

Page 14, line 2, after ("grant") insert ("for the currency period").

Page 14, line 4, after ("the") insert ("maximum").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next is a drafting Amendment to bring the clause into conformity with Clause 5 (1) (c).

Amendment moved— Page 14, line 9, after ("which") insert ("or the places so specified between which").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next Amendment is drafting.

Amendment moved— Page 14, line 10, leave out ("should") and insert ("shall").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

I beg to move the two following Amendments standing in my name.

Amendments moved—

Page 14, line 24, leave out from the beginning of the line to ("has") in line 26, and insert: ("(4) This section shall apply to every application under subsection (3) of Section three of this Act for a short-term A licence, Or short-term B licence, unless the licensing authority is of opinion either—

1. (a) that, having regard to the trivial nature of the application, it is not necessary that any opportunity should be given for objection; or
2. (b) that the application ")

Page 14, line 30, leave out from ("impracticable") to the end of the subsection.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendments agreed to.

EARL HOWE moved, at the end of subsection (4), to insert: "and such inquiries shall be held in public unless the licensing authority intimates in any case that in the interests of justice it is expedient that the inquiry should be held in private." The noble Earl said: The object of this Amendment is to provide for a public inquiry and at the same time to preserve the right of a private inquiry should it appear to be right. The point was raised by me on the Second Reading the other day and the noble Marquess then gave an assurance that inquiries under the Bill would be held in public. The purpose of this Amendment is merely to make that quite clear.

Amendment move— Page 14, line 36, at end, insert the said words.—(Earl Howe.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I think the noble Earl must have misunderstood what was said on the Second Reading. What I think was said was that there was no desire to maintain any secrecy about these inquiries, but the provisions with regard to inquiries have been placed in the Bill in the interests of applicants. If every inquiry is to be taken in public the expense to the applicant would have to be much greater than it would be if the Bill goes through in its present form, by which there would be a simple application in writing. There is really ample provision for publicity with regard to these matters if there is any serious question at stake. To begin with, in the case of revocation of a licence the holder of the licence will be in a position and have the right to ask that the inquiry should be held in public. Furthermore, if there is any question of an appeal the appeal will go to a Tribunal and all Tribunal appeals will naturally be heard in public. Therefore I do not think there is any sound justification for the noble Lord's fear that there will be undue secrecy. I can assure him that that is not the desire of the Government, and I think that the Bill amply provides for seeing that the applicant does not suffer in any respect from that cause.

EARL HOWE

I was under the impression the other day that the Minister gave us a quite definite assurance that inquiries held under the Bill would be public ones. Any impression to the contrary would, I think, be most unfortunate. We have no information as to how the licensing authority will conduct its inquiry, or as to whether the evidence given before it will be on oath. Will it be just tittle-tattle collected from common informers? How will that, evidence be collected? Still more, how will it be presented? It is most desirable that there should be no suspicion whatever of any hole-and-corner work, or of any doubtful evidence being given or acted upon. It does not seem to me very much to ask that the inquiry should be in public while, at the same time, its private character should be preserved if it became necessary to do so. The noble Earl said that the public inquiry would very largely increase the expense, but I do not follow that. I cannot see why a public inquiry should be much more expensive to the licence holder than a private one. I think there are all sorts of loopholes for suspicion under the Bill, and it will be very much better if the noble Earl could give us the concession we ask for

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I am afraid it is not possible for the Government to do that. I think I gave sufficient reasons to show that the effect of laying down that every inquiry should be held in public would be to increase the cost very much. At present it is possible for an application to be granted by correspondence. That clearly saves a lot of money. Instead of a man having to come up to attend the inquiry personally at the headquarters of the licensing authority these simple applications will go through without any fuss, and with very much less expense than if the inquiry had to be in public. If there is any question of the wrong kind of evidence being taken into consideration, there is a remedy at once in the fact that the applicant can appeal, and his appeal will have to be heard by the Tribunal. The inquiry by the Tribunal will be held in public, and if there is any attempt to use evidence that should not be used an appeal to the Tribunal will reveal that at, once, and it is perfectly clear that public opinion will be such that that kind of way of conducting these inquiries could not possibly be maintained.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next Amendment is drafting.

Amendment moved— Page 15, line 8, leave out ("vehicles to be specified in the licence") and insert ("authorised vehicles").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 10, as amended, agreed to.

LORD MELCHETT moved to insert the following new clause after Clause 10:

Provisions as to holding and subsidiary companies.

".—(1) Where a holding company on an application for a licence signifies to the licensing authority its desire that the provisions of this section should have effect as respects a subsidiary company specified in the application, then, in relation to the application and to any licence granted thereon to the holding company and to the use of the authorised vehicles, this Part of this Act shall have effect—

1. (a) as if goods vehicles belonging to, or in the possession of, the subsidiary company, were vehicles belonging to, or in the possession of, the holding company:
2. (b) as if, where a goods vehicle is used in circumstances in which, but for this provision, the subsidiary company would be deemed to be the user thereof, the holding company were the user thereof:
3. (c)as if a trade or business carried on by the subsidiary company were a trade or business carried on by the holding company:
4. (d)as if a person employed by the subsidiary company as a driver or statutory attendant of an authorised vehicle were a person employed by the holding company:
5. (e)as if the subsidiary company were an applicant for the licence.

(2) The provisions of this section shall cease to have effect as respects any subsidiary company—

1. (a) if the holding company gives notice to the licensing authority that it desires that this section should, as from any date, cease to apply to that company, as from that date; or that it desires that this section should cease to apply to that company; or
2. (b) as from the date on which that company ceases to be a subsidiary company of the holding company.

(3) In this section the expression holding company 'means a company which is the beneficial owner of not less than ninety per cent. of the issued share capital of another company, and the expression subsidiary company,' in relation to a holding company, means a company not less than ninety per cent. of the issued share capital of which is in the beneficial ownership of the holding company.

Where a subsidiary company (as herein-before defined) is the beneficial owner of any shares of another company, those shares shall be treated for the purposes of the foregoing definitions as if they were in the beneficial ownership of the holding company.

The noble Lord said: This clause is designed to remove certain anomalies that would occur between companies and their subsidiary companies as organised in industrial units. The principle has been discussed this afternoon, has been discussed in another place, and has been accepted really from the beginning by the Government. It was also raised on the Second Reading by the noble Marquess opposite (Lord Reading). The object is to enable companies, which are organised as holding companies with subsidiaries, to carry their own goods, whereas, as the Bill is drafted, that would not be the case. The matter has been discussed by the representatives of the. Federation of British Industries and the Associated Chambers of Commerce with the advisers of the Ministry of Transport, and the present clause is agreed between them. The noble Lord, Lord Cozens-Hardy, raised the question of why 90 per cent. had been chosen as tie definition of a subsidiary company. The cases of subsidiary companies are continually being defined in legislation, and 90 per cent. was agreed because it is the definition taken in Section 55 of the Finance Act, 1927, and Section 42 of the Finance Act, 1930. We should have been pleased to have 51 per cent., but the Government did not see its way to agreeing to that, and therefore we should be quite prepared to take 90 per cent.

Amendment moved— After Clause 10 insert the said new clause.—(Lord Melchett.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

I do not feel that, after the debate which has taken place on this subject, there is any need for me to add to what I have already said. The noble Lord has told your Lordships that this clause is the result of discussions which have taken place between the Federation of British Industries and the Ministry of Transport, and they have come to the conclusion that 90 per cent. must be the figure in- cluded in the Bill. At an early stage this afternoon I endeavoured to point out to the noble and learned Lord, Lord Cozens-Hardy, that in our opinion, with a lesser percentage than 90 per cent., the ramifications of many associated companies would be of so loose a character that the provisions which we seek to impose in this Bill could not possibly be carried out. For this reason we are prepared to accept the clause moved by my noble friend.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF KINNOULL moved to insert the following new clause:

Drivers' licences.

".—(1) A person shall not drive a goods vehicle on a road unless he is licensed for the purpose under this Part of this Act, and a person shall not employ any person who is not so licensed to drive a goods vehicle on a road.

(2) A person shall be disqualified for obtaining a licence to drive a goods vehicle unless he is over the age of twenty-one and fulfils such other conditions as may be prescribed:

Provided that the above-mentioned limit of age shall be dispensed with if the applicant shows to the satisfaction of the licensing authority that he was during the six months immediately preceding the first day of January, nineteen hundred and thirty-three, regularly employed as a driver of a goods vehicle.

(3) A licence to drive a goods vehicle may be limited to such type or types of vehicles as may be specified in the licence.

(4) An application for a licence to act as a driver of a goods vehicle shall be made to the licensing authority for the area in which the applicant resides.

(5) The provisions of Sections seventy-nine, eighty, and eighty-two of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, shall apply to any licence granted under this section as though it were a licence granted under the provisions of Part IV of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, with the substitution of the licensing authority for the Traffic Commissioners referred to in the aforesaid Act."

The noble Earl said: The drivers of passenger service vehicles under the Road Traffic Act, 1930, must hold a special licence in addition to the ordinary driving licence to enable them to drive such vehicles. The object of this new clause is to provide for similar licences for the drivers of goods vehicles, the same machinery for the issue of the licences being used. Subsection (2) provides that nobody may drive a goods vehicle unless he is over the age of twenty-one. I think that is a very excellent provision, as practically everybody will agree that people under twenty-one are inclined to be reckless. In the same subsection it is provided that if the driver has driven for six months before the 1st of January, 1933, he is exempted horn this provision. I think in the interests of public safety this Amendment should be made. I notice it is argued that the driver of a public service vehicle is a special case, but the driver of a goods vehicle, after all, can endanger those passengers. The goods vehicle is frequently larger and heavier than anything else on the road, and, unless it be in the hands of an expert, it may prove the source of great danger to others using the roads. We are dealing here with a special type of vehicle to which should be applied the same test as is applied to passenger vehicles.

Amendment moved— After Clause 10 insert the said new clause.—(The Earl of Kinnoull.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

A similar clause to the one which has been moved by the noble Earl was moved in another place on the Committee stage and again on Report and, after a debate on each occasion, was rejected on a Division. The effect of the clause would be to require drivers of goods vehicles to be licensed in the same manner as drivers of public service vehicles under the Road Traffic Act of 1930. The clause would also impose a minimum age limit of 21 for drivers of goods vehicles. At the present time, under Section 9 of the Act of 1930, this age limit only applies to drivers of locomotives, motor tractors and heavy motor cars. The age limit for the lighter types of goods vehicles, which fall into the motor car class, is 17; and it seems to me, while this higher age might be imposed for drivers who deal actually with passenger traffic, still it is a matter which I think would require much further consideration before limiting it in the manner in which the noble Earl proposes to limit it by his Amendment.

There is a good deal to be said in favour of a driving test for drivers of goods vehicles, though the arguments are not so strong as those in the case of drivers of public service vehicles. But if the drivers of goods vehicles are to be subject to a test it would logically follow that the same requirement should be placed on the drivers of all motor vehicles. It is quite probable that Parliament may reach this decision, but I feel sure your Lordships will agree with me when I say that such a provision should be of universal application. It seems to me illogical to apply this regulation piecemeal to the drivers of goods vehicles in the present Bill. The Minister of Transport proposes to review the whole question of statutory requirements relating to the driving of motor vehicles when the official investigation which is now being carried out into the causes and circumstances of fatal road accidents is completed, and when that examination and that investigations has taken place the Minister of Transport will then be in a position to make recommendations on definite information in the direction which the noble Earl suggests. We are not able to accept the Amendment.

LORD PONSONBY OF SHULBREDE

I rather hoped the Government would accept something of this kind, because this is a safety provision, and I think it would have been a great advantage to bring this into the Bill. The noble Marquess said they could not draw a hard and fast line in insisting on tests for the drivers of these heavy goods vehicles and not for the drivers of ordinary cars. I think there is a great distinction between the two. I have always seen the difficulty of having tests for all motor cars, but in this case you have a man who has got to drive whether he likes it or not, who has got to go on driving whether he likes it or not, whatever the weather, and that is not the case with the private motorist. Therefore I hope that this is a matter which may be taken into very close consideration when the Minister of Transport has before him all the facts in regard to road accidents. I would almost say it is a matter which requires his urgent attention.

EARL HOWE

I only rise for a few brief seconds to emphasise the fact that the noble Marquess has just made a statement which, if I heard him aright, is of the greatest possible importance from the point of view of all motor users throughout the country. I understood the noble Marquess to say that it was quite probable, as the result of the investigations which the Government are carrying out into motor accidents, that tests would be imposed by Parliament for all drivers. If that is so, if I heard him aright, may I say how very much I welcome the fact that there is a possibility of this being carried out? I must join issue with the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby, who spoke just now and tried to draw a distinction between drivers who have to carry on whatever the conditions and those drivers who have not to carry on. That is an absolutely impossible distinction. I do not see it for a moment. A driver may be caught out at any moment in unfavourable conditions on the road, and Parliament ought to insist that a driver so caught out in these conditions, whether on private service or on public service, whether he is a goods driver or any other, ought to be a competent man. It is very unsafe to allow anybody but a competent man to have charge of a motor vehicle. I welcome the statement the noble Marquess has just made, which I consider to be of the utmost possible importance.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

Clause 11:

Power to revoke or suspend licences.

11.—(1) A licence may be revoked or suspended by the licensing authority on the ground that any of the conditions attached to the licence have not been complied with;

Provided that the licensing authority shall not revoke or suspend a licence unless he is satisfied, after holding a public inquiry, if the holder of the licence requests him so to do, that owing to the frequency of the breach of conditions on the part of the holder of the licence, or to the breach having been committed wilfully, or to the danger to the public involved in the breach, the licence should be revoked or suspended.

(2) In any case where a licence is revoked or suspended the licensing authority shall, if requested by the licence holder, state in writing the grounds for the revocation or suspension.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 15, line 11, after ("authority") insert ("by whom the licence was granted").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

This also is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 15, line 12, leave out ("attached to") and insert ("of").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

LORD ILIFFE moved, in the proviso in subsection (1), to leave out "he" and insert "the holder of the licence or a person employed by him has been convicted of an offence of having failed to comply with the conditions attached to the licence and unless the licensing authority." The noble Lord said: This Amendment is designed to prevent a licence being revoked unless the holder or his servant is convicted of an offence under the conditions of the licence in a court of summary jurisdiction where evidence is taken on oath. The licensing authorities apparently are not concerned to take evidence on oath, and as the refusal to renew a licence or the decision to revoke a licence is a very serious matter it is very unsatisfactory that such a step should be taken without the evidence being taken on oath. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 15, line 15, leave out ("he") and insert the said new words.—(Lord Iliffe.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

We cannot accept this Amendment, which really strikes at the root of the Bill, one of the main objects being that the granting of a licence should be a sanction for the proper observance of the conditions which are laid down. It is notorious that up till now these regulations have been constantly broken, and the threat of a comparatively small fine has not been sufficient to deter those who have been breaking them. The power to revoke a licence is one which we believe will have very great effect. I think it is right and proper that the authority should be entitled to take into consideration any evidence, from whatever source he believes to be the right one. For instance, the Industrial Court might determine that the holder was not paying fair wages nor observing proper conditions of employment. This would not be a conviction, but if the noble Lord's Amendment was passed it would not be open to the authority to revoke this licence, even if the Industrial Court proved the licence holder had not been paying fair wages. There are other forms of evidence which it is only right and proper should be taken into consideration. I should like to draw the noble Lord's attention to the fact that there is a subsection in this Bill which requires a licensing authority, before revoking or suspending a licence, to hold a public inquiry into the matter should he be requested to do so, and there is always the right of appeal.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next Amendment is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 15, line 18, leave out ("on the part of the holder").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRYmoved to add to the clause: (3) The licensing authority may, in lieu of revoking or suspending a licence, direct that any one or more of the vehicles specified therein shall be removed therefrom or that the maximum number of motor vehicles or of trailers specified in the licence in pursuance of paragraphs (b) and (c) respectively of subsection (6) of Section two of this Act shall be reduced, and references in this or any other section of this A[...] to the revocation or suspension of a licence shall be construed as including a reference to the giving of a direction under this subsection.

The noble Marquess said: It has been represented that the revocation or suspension of a licence under the provisions of Clause 11 would carry with it such serious consequences to the operator—in most cases it would put him completely out of business—that the powers conferred on the licensing authority in that behalf would rarely, if ever, be exercised. The provisions of the new subsection proposed to be inserted by this Amendment, would enable the licensing authority to suspend or revoke a licence in part, that is to say, in respect of specified vehicles. There would be the same right of appeal to the Appeal Tribunal in respect of a partial suspension or revocation as in the case of a complete suspension or revocation.

Amendment moved— Page 15, line 25, at end, to insert the said new subsection.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

EARL HOWE

On a point of Order, I am afraid I did not realise that the noble Lord had moved the Amendment in page 15, line 18; at least I understood that he said something about it being a drafting Amendment, but really it contains a point of great substance to the motor transport industry about which we are anxious.

THE LORD CHAIRMAN

I understood that it was a drafting Amendment, and I am afraid it has been passed.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 11, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 12 agreed to.

Clause 13:

Appeals to Appeal Tribunal in connection with licences.

13.—(1)Any person who,—

(c) being the holder of a licence, is aggrieved by the revocation or suspension thereof, or by any variation of the conditions attached thereto,

may within the prescribed time and in the prescribed manner appeal to the Appeal Tribunal to be constituted under this Part of this Act (in this Part of this Act referred to as "the Tribunal").

(7) Where the Minister proposes to appoint a person to be a member or deputy member of the Tribunal, he shall, before making the appointment, require the person whom lie proposes to appoint to declare whether he has any, and if se what, financial interest in any undertaking which provides facilities for the transport of goods.

(15) Where a person who has applied for a new licence in substitution for a licence held by him and in force at the date of his application appeals to the Tribunal, the existing licence shall, notwithstanding the provisions of this. Part of this Act as to the duration of licences, continue in force until the appeal has been disposed of, without prejudice however to the exercise in the meantime of the powers of suspension and revocation conferred by this Part of this Act.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

moved, in subsection (1) (c), to leave out "or by any variation of the conditions attached thereto." The noble Marquess said: This is a. drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 16, line 4, leave out from ("thereof") to the end of line 5.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

EARL HOWE

The noble Marquess says that this is a drafting Amendment, but it seems to me that the proposal is to omit words which permit of an appeal to the Tribunal against the variation of the conditions of a licence, and I should like to ask the noble Marquess why it is desired to omit these words at this stage, observing that it was not considered necessary to do so when the matter was before the House of Commons.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

In amplification of this drafting Amendment, I would point out that an appeal against a refusal to make a variation is already provided for in paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of Clause 13.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

I understand that the noble Marquess is good enough to accept the next amendment and therefore I formally move the insertion of the words appearing in the Marshalled List.

Amendment moved— Page 16, line 42, at end insert ("If any person being a member or deputy member of the Tribunal acquires any financial interest in any undertaking which provides facilities for the transport of goods he shall within four weeks after so doing give notice thereof in writing to the Minister specifying the interest so acquired and the Minister after taking the matter into consideration may, if he thinks fit, declare that such person has vacated his office").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved, in subsection (9), a manuscript Amendment, to leave out the word "may" ["Such rules may provide"], and insert "shall." The noble Viscount said: I have not had an opportunity of approaching the noble Marquess on this question, and I therefore do not wish to press it to-night; but if your Lordships will refer to subsection (9) on page 17 of the Bill and will look at line 12, you will see that it reads "Such rules may provide that an appellant shall be entitled to be heard in person, in support of his appeal, or by counsel, solicitor or agent." If your Lordships will look at Clause 24 of the Bill, which deals with regulations made under the Bill, you will observe that it reads: "Any regulations made by the Minister under this Act shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament as soon as may be after they are made," and that they may be annulled. It seems to me rather a peculiar position that an appellant in a case of this sort should not be entitled to be heard in person or by his counsel or agent, and therefore I do hope that the noble Marquess will consider the matter between now and the Report stage, and if he agrees, I should be very much obliged to him if he would himself move the Amendment, because unfortunately I cannot myself be present.

Amendment moved— Page 17, line 12, leave out ("may") and insert ("shall").—(Viscount Beetle of Thame.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The noble Viscount who moved this Amendment is such a determined purist that I am diffident in venturing to cross swords with him, but I am informed that the words "the Tribunal may" are the phraseology which is invariably used, and consequently that phraseology has been adopted in the present Bill.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

The noble Marquess has not given me any precedent for this. If he can do that between now and Wednesday next I shall be very much obliged, because if I cannot be present myself on that occasion I can get some other noble Lord to move the Amendment for me. In the meantime I beg leave to withdraw it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved, in subsection (15), after the second "licence," to insert "other than a short-term licence." The noble Marquess said: The effect of this Amendment is to make it clear that it is only a licence for the full currency period which can continue in force pending an appeal to the Tribunal, otherwise a short-term licence which had been granted only for a special purpose or for administrative convenience might continue indefinitely pending the decision of an appeal.

Amendment moved— Page 18, line 6, after the second ("licence") insert ("other than a short-term licence").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 13, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 14:

Records as to hours of work, journeys, loads, &.

14.—(1) Subject to the provisions of reguiations made under this section, the holder of a licence shall cause to be kept, in accordance with the regulations, current records showing—

1. (a)as respects every person employed by him as a driver or statutory attendant of an authorised vehicle, the times at which that person commenced and ceased work and particulars of his intervals of rest;
2. (b)as respects every journey of a vehicle on which goods are carried under the licence, particulars of the itinerary of the
237
3. journey and of the greatest weight of goods carried by the vehicle at any one time during the period to which the record relates and the description and destination of tie goods carried,

and the regulations may make provision for requiring drivers of authorised vehicles to carry the prescribed documents and to make the prescribed entries therein.

(2) The Minister shall consult with the Transport Advisory Council constituted under this Act as to the form in which records are to be kept under regulations made under this section.

(3)Subject to the provisions of the regulations made under this section a. licensing authority may dispense with the observance, as respects the carriage of goods under a licence granted by him, of any requirement of those regulations, and may grant such a dispensation either generally, or as respects any particular vehicle, or as respects the use of vehicles for any particular purpose, but he shall not grant such a dispensation unless he is satisfied that it is not reasonably practicable, having regard to the nature of the business concerned, for the requirement dispensed with to be observed:

provided that in the case of vehicles used in the business of agriculture, or in the business of a travelling showman, he shall grant a dispensation except in so far as he is satisfied that for special reasons the observance of any requirement of the regulations is desirable as respects particular vehicles, or as respects vehicles used for any particular purpose.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The next Amendment is a drafting Amendment.

Amendment moved— Page 18, line 21, at end insert ("keep or").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQESS OF LONDONDERRY

The object of the next Amendment is to ensure that an owner-driver shall not be relieved of his duty of keeping a record.

Amendment moved— Page 18. line 28, at end insert ("and the like information as respects himself when acting. as such a driver or attendant").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE EARL OF KINNOULL moved, in subsection (1), at the end of paragraph (a), to insert "and of the wages paid and the method of payment." The noble Earl said: I must apologise for putting both this Amendment and two subsequent Amendments at such short notice. The object of this Amendment is to include the amount of wages paid and the method of payment on the record cards of drivers, because there are several different methods of payment of drivers. There is, for instance, payment on mileage loading, in which case the driver gets nothing, or practically nothing, on his return journey when his vehicle is empty, and it tends to make him hurry, and possibly causes accidents through excessive speed. Also there is payment made by way of tonnage bonus. I should say here that in most cases—in fact in nearly all cases—there is a small overriding wage paid, but it is totally inadequate. It has been felt that in the case of an accident it would help the police when taking particulars to see on the record card the amount of wages and the method of payment in order to fix the onus of blame

Amendment moved— Page 18, line 28, at end insert ("and of the wages paid and the method of payment").—(The Earl of Kinnoull.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

This Amendment has been handed in by the noble. Lord in manuscript. The effect of the Amendment is to require records to be kept by the holders of licences of the wages paid to the drivers. I think that would be regarded as inquisitorial. The records to be kept under this Bill are those which have a bearing on public safety; by which I mean the prevention of overloading and excessive speed, and also excessive hours of driving. I think this extra proviso which the noble Lord desires is really unnecessary. If a man is dissatisfied with his wages he has a proper redress. He can apply to his trade union and have these matters looked into. I am inclined to think that to have this added is quite unnecessary.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

LORD ILIFFE moved, in subsection (1) (b), to leave out "the" ["the licence"] and insert "an A or B". The noble Lord said: The object of this Amendment is to make it unnecessary for C lience holders to keep records except in regard to the hours of work and intervals of rest. The C licence holder would be obliged to keep records in respect of persons employed by him, and the times at which the persons commence and cease work, and particulars of intervals of rest. But if this Amendment is agreed to it would not be necessary for him to keep records in respect of every journey of a vehicle in which goods are carried, particulars of the itinerary of the journey and weight of goods carried, and records with regard to the description and destination of the goods carried. Noble Lords will realise that vehicles which are subject to C licences are vehicles which only carry goods the property of the licence holder, and do not convey goods for hire or reward. In my opinion it is most undesirable that the licensees should be required to provide records which really seem to serve no useful purpose.

Amendment moved— Page 18, line 30, leave out ("the") and insert ("an A or B").—(Lord Iliffe.

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I am afraid the Government cannot accept this Amendment. The object of journey records is to ensure that the statutory limits of weight and speed are not exceeded. Vehicles operating under C licences are just as likely to be guilty of infringements of these limits as those operating under any other licences. I honestly cannot see that there is justification for a complete exemption of C licence holders from these requirements. I would like to remind the noble Lord that regulations with regard to these records will only be made after consultation with the Transport Advisory Council, upon which the owners of goods transport vehicles will be represented. Furthermore, the licensing authority has already, or will have, powers under this Bill to dispense with the observance, of certain regulations if the situation warrants it. I dare say there is a good reason for exempting some C licence holders in certain cases from having to record certain facts which would be applicable in the case of other holders of C licences, but there are powers already in the Bill for the licensing authority to do so.

LORD COZENS-HARDY

I desire to support this Amendment particularly in relation to the words in paragraph (b). Why should it be necessary to give in the case of the C licences the description and destination of the goods carried? These records would give complete information as to the holders' customers and the amount of trade done with those customers. That is very important information which a C holder should not, I submit, be required to divulge, and under the paragraph he would have to divulge it to any person authorised by a police officer. I submit that the requirement to give information of that kind in regard to C licences is unnecessary to achieve the purpose of the section.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved, in subsection (1) (b), to leave out "the itinerary of." The noble Marquess said: The retention of the words "the itinerary of" might be held to require the record of journeys in unnecessary detail, and the specification of every village through which a vehicle passed on a particular journey.

Amendment moved— Page 18, line 31, leave out ("the itinerary of").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

EARL HOWE moved, in subsection (1) (b), after "weight," to insert "or number of packages." The noble Earl said: I am moving this Amendment in order to try to secure, if I can, an answer from the Minister with reference to the question of weight as against the number of packages. This Amendment was moved in another place and the Minister, I understand, said he would consider any other form of words if they could be suggested, or if his Department could think out any other alternative form of words in the meantime. I therefore move the Amendment in order to get an explanation, if I can, from the Minister.

Amendment moved— Page 18, line 32, after ("weight") insert ("or number of packages").—(Earl Howe.)

THE EARL OF PLYMOUTH

I can only repeat what I have said, that the object of keeping the record is to see there is no infringement as regards weight and speed. As far as weight is concerned, we know the number of packages, and if you do not know their weight, to record it is no use to any one. I think that is perfectly clear. I had not realised that the Minister in another place had undertaken to see if he could find words which might meet the arguments put forward by the noble Earl's friends, but I can only repeat to him that there are already regulations which make provision for exemptions in certain circumstances where the nature of the work being done warrants it.

EARL HOWE

The Amendment was moved because there are many descriptions of goods which are carried about the country where the weight cannot possibly be given, such as timber, which is measured by feet, and there are other cargoes of various descriptions, but if the Minister is satisfied that this clause is all right as it stands I will not press the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

LORD COZENS-HARDY moved in the prosviso in subsection (3), after the first "vehicles," to insert "operated under C licence or." The noble Lord said: For reasons I advanced in connection with an earlier Amendment I fail to see that it is necessary to require such things as the description and destination of goods carried to be recorded in order to secure that there is no infringement of the regulation. Why is it necessary to have a description of goods carried in order to see whether the man has gone too fast or has worked too long? For that reason I suggest the addition of the words "operated under a C licence."

Amendment moved— Page 19, line 12, after ("vehicles") insert ("operated under a C licence or").—(Lord Cozens-Hardy.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

I cannot accept the Amendment moved by the noble Lord. Its effect would be to exempt all holders of C licences from the requirements as to the keeping of records, etc., laid down in the clause. It goes even further than the earlier Amendment in the names of my noble friend Lord Howe and others at page 18, line 30, in that if the present Amendment were adopted the holder of a C licence would also be exempted from the requirement to keep records showing the times of work and rest of drivers and statutory attendants. It follows, therefore, a fortiori that as the Amendment in the names of my noble friend Lord Howe and others has been rejected the present Amendment should fall.

On Question, Amendment negatived.

Clause 14, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 15:

Enforcement of obligation to maintain goods vehicles in serviceable condition.

(2) An examiner shall at any time, on production if so required of his authority, he entitled to enter and inspect any goods vehicle, and for that purpose to detain the vehicle during such time as is required for the inspection, and may at any time which is reasonable, having regard to the circumstances of the case, enter any premises on which ho has reason to believe that a goods vehicle is kept and, if any person obstructs an examiner in the performance of his duty, he shall be guilty of an offence under this Part of this Act.

(3) If on the inspection of a goods vehicle it appears to an examiner that the vehicle, owing to any defects therein, is, or is likely to become, unfit for service until the defects have been remedied, he may prohibit the use of the vehicle on a road for the carriage of goods:

Provided that, where in the opinion of the examiner the defects are such as can be remedied within any period not exceeding ten days and are not defects which involve immediate risk to public safety, the prohibition shall not conic into operation before the expiration of that period, and shall not come into operation upon the expiration of that period if any examiner, being satisfied that the defects have been or are in course of being remedied, withdraws the prohibiting before the expiration of that period.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved, in subsection (2), to leave out "kept" and insert "at the time." The noble Viscount said: Clause 15, subsection 2, reads as follows: An examiner …may at any time which is reasonable, having regard to the circumstances of the case, enter any premises on which he has reason to believe that a goods vehicle is kept …

I think that the word "kept" may be held to have a rather restricted meaning. The vehicle would be kept generally at some central garage, but it might be temporarily on some other premises and I think that an examiner ought to have the right to enter and inspect the vehicle at any place. If your Lordships accept my Amendment he will be able to do so.

Amendment moved— Page 20, line 8, leave out ("kept") and insert ("at the time").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

I do not find myself altogether in disagreement with the noble Viscount, but I think it would be best to keep the wording as it is in the Bill. The intention which I think the noble Viscount has in mind is that a vehicle is being "kept" on whatever premises it happens to be at the time. The wording is the same as in subsection (3) of Section 69 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, and if it were altered in the present case some doubt might be thrown on the scope of the section in the Road Traffic Act. Therefore I suggest that the noble Viscount might withdraw his Amendment.

VICOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

After the explanation given by the noble Marquess, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME moved, in the proviso to subsection (3), to substitute "forty-eight hours" for "ten days". The noble Viscount said: Under Section 71 of the Road Traffic Act, forty-eight hours is the time allowed. There is a very great difference in this Bill which extends the time to ten days. I understand there are some difficulties about reducing the time to forty-eight hours because Sunday or Christmas Day might intervene, but I should have thought that five days would give ample time and I throw out that suggestion for the noble Marquess to consider.

Amendment moved— Page 20, line 20, leave out ("ten days") and insert ("forty-eight hours").—(Viscount Bertie of Thame.)

EARL HOWE

I should like to be allowed to say that those for whom I speak very much object to the proposal to reduce the time stated in the Bill from ten days to forty-eight hours. They say it would not give them time in all cases to remedy even minor defects. I cannot see why there should be any objection to the ten days.

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

If the accident is slight it can easily be remedied in five days.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

I think the noble Earl has really put the case against this Amendment. As regards goods vehicles the period has intentionally been extended in the present Bill to ten days. For this there are various reasons. In the first place goods vehicles in many cases have a wider area of operation than passenger-carrying vehicles which operate on fixed routes and gener- ally return to their headquarters either the same day or perhaps the day following. Again in the case of passenger vehicles, the convenience and comfort of passengers have to be taken into consideration as well as their safety. I think also that it should be noted that the proviso in question is governed through-out by the consideration that the examiner shall be satisfied that the defects are not such as would involve immediate risk to public safety.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 15 agreed to.

Clause 16:

Further powers of examiners and powers of police constables.

16.—(1) An examiner may at any time, on production if so required of his authority, require the person in charge of any goods vehicle to produce, and permit him to inspect and copy, any document which by or by regulations made under this Part of this Act is required to be carried on, or by the driver of, the vehicle and for that purpose may detain the vehicle for such time as is required for the inspection and copying and, if any person, when required by an examiner so to do, fails to produce to the examiner any such document as aforesaid, or to permit him to inspect or copy any such document, that person shall he guilty of an offence under this Part of this Act.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved, in subsection (1), after "Act" to insert "or the Road Traffic Act, 1930". The noble Marquess said: The Amendment which I have the honour to move is for the purpose of enabling examiners and certifying officers to inspect documents required to be carried under the Road Traffic Act, 1930. By that I mean driving licences and certificates of insurance, as well as documents required to be carried under the provisions of this Bill.

Amendment moved— Page 21ine 39, after ("Act") insert ("or the Road Traffic Act, 1930").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

EARL HOWE moved to amend the proposed Amendment by inserting, after "1930": Provided that if within five days after an examiner has required the production of a driver's licence or a certificate of insurance issued under the Road Traffic Act, 1930, the driver produces the licence or the certificate as the case may be in person at such police station as may have been specified by him at the time its production was required he shall not be convicted of an offence under this subsection by reason only et failure to produce the licence or certificate to the examiner. The noble Earl said: The purpose of my Amendment to the proposed Amendment is to make it quite clear that the examiner cannot require, like a police man, production of the insurance certificate and the driver's licence. Noble Lords will no doubt remember that under the Road Traffic Act permission is given to a motor driver, if he dues not carry his licence and his insurance certificate on the vehicle, to produce it at any police station he may choose within five days. I submit that it is undesirable to force drivers to carry their insurance certificates and their driving licences on their vehicles. They can easily get lost, and they can easily get damaged. It is very much better from the point of view of the authorities that they should be left at home. If a vehicle happens to be stolen it would be very much better that the insurance certificate should not be on the vehicle. I cannot see any reason why the examiner should wish to know whether a vehicle is insured. It is very necessary for the police to know, but I do not think it is any part of the duties of an examiner to lied out whether a driver has a driving licence and an insurance certificate.

Amendment to the proposed Amendment moved— After ("1930") insert the said proviso.—(Earl Howe.)

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

I am not in disagreement with the mover of this Amendment, but I would venture to say that the Amendment does not come in the right place nor is it very conveniently worded. This, however, is a matter which we have under consideration and it can be dealt with on Report.

EARL HOWE

After what the noble Marquess has said I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment to the proposed Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 16, as amended, agreed to.

Clauses 17 to 22 agreed to.

Clause 23:

General power of making regulations.

23. The Minister may make regulations for any purpose for which regulations may be made under this Part of this Act and for prescribing anything which may be prescribed under this Part of this Act and generally for the purpose of carrying this Part of this Act into effect and, in particular, but without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provisions, may make regulations with respect to any of the following matters,—

(d) the means by which vehicles are to be identified, whether by plates, marks or otherwise, as being authorised vehicles under a licence;

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY

The Amendment standing in my name is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 25, line 8, leave out ("under a licence").—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

May I point out that the insertion of the new clause after Clause 24 will require an alteration in the title? There is no Amendment on the Paper to that effect.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Clause 23, as amended, agreed to.

Clause 24 agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved, after Clause 24, to insert the following new clause:

Variation of traffic areas.

".—(1) Whereas it is expedient that the existing traffic areas under the Road Traffic Act, 1930, in England should be varied—

1. (a) by the abolition of the Southern Traffic Area and the transfer of the areas constituting it to other Traffic Areas; and
2. (b) by the transfer of part of the East Midland Traffic Area to the Eastern Traffic Area:

Now, therefore, as from the first day of January, nineteen hundred and thirty-four (in this section referred to as "the said date")—

1. (i) England shall be divided into the Traffic Areas specified in the first column of the First Schedule to this Act and those Traffic Areas shall consist of the several areas respectively specified in the second column of that Schedule;
2. (ii) the said First Schedule to this Act shall he substituted for Part I of the Third Schedule to the Road Traffic Act, 1930, and references to that Schedule in any enactment shall be construed accordingly;
3. (iii)the offices of the Traffic Commissioners for the Southern Traffic Area shall he abolished.

(2) The Minister may by order make such consequential and incidental provisions as appear to him to be necessary or expedient in consequence of the variations of traffic areas effected by this section and, in particular, but without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing words, provision may be made in the order with respect to—

1. (a)the effect, as from the said date, of licences previously issued or backed, and consents previously given, by the Commissioners for any traffic area abolished or otherwise affected;
2. (b) the effect of applications for licences or consents made before the said date to the Commissioners for any traffic area abolished or otherwise affected, the Commissioners to whom applications relating to any such area may be made between the date of the order and the said date, and the Commissioners by whom and the places at which any such applications as aforesaid may be heard, either before or after the said date;
3. (c)the continuance of appeals pending at the said date against decisions of the Commissioners for any traffic area abolished or otherwise affected; and (dthe recovery of any sums due at the said date to the Commissioners for any traffic area abolished.

(3) Any order made by the Minister under Section sixty-two of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, for varying the number or limits of traffic areas may contain such consequential and incidental provisions, including provisions with respect to any of the matters mentioned in the last preceding subsection, as appear to him to be necessary or expedient in consequence of the variations of areas to be effected by the order.

(4) For subsection (3) of the said Section sixty-two, there shall be substituted the following subsection:—

(3) An order made under this section shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament, and shall be of no effect unless and until it has been approved by a Resolution passed by each House of Parliament."

The noble Marquess said: I propose with your Lordships' permission to add a new Clause 25. Under the provisions of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, England and Scotland are divided into thirteen traffic areas under Traffic Commissioners set up under that Act, for the licensing and control of public services of omnibuses and motor coaches. The constitution of the areas is set out in the Third Schedule to the Act of 1930. The main object of the present clause is to provide for the abolition of the Southern Area the headquarters of which are at Reading, and the distribution of this area among the adjacent areas. This course is being adopted for reasons of economy and more convenient administration. The clause at the same time provides for a readjustment of the boundary between the Eastern Area and the East Midland Area. Although the decision to do away with the Southern Traffic Area as from 1st January, 1934, was reached in July last, it would not have been possible to conform with the procedure laid down in the Act of 1930, as the House of Lords would not have sat for the necessary 28 days before the 1st January, 1934. This last date cannot be altered as it is proposed that on that date the scheme for the licensing of goods vehicles provided for in the present Bill shall come into effect, and it is essential that the redistribution of the areas should take place at the same time. It has therefore proved necessary to provide for the abolition of the Southern Area in the present Bill. This course has the advantage of setting out the new areas in a complete Schedule which can readily be referred to.

Subsection (4) of the new clause substitutes the procedure of an affirmative Resolution on the part of each House of Parliament for the more cumbersome procedure laid down in the Act of 1930 with regard to any future orders made by the Minister for varying the number or limits of traffic areas. Subsection (2) of the clause provides that the Minister may by order make consequential and incidential provisions with regard to such matters, for example, as the effect of licences granted by the existing Commissioners for the Southern Area and the procedure to be followed in respect of applications pending before the same Commissioners. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— After Clause 24, insert the said new clause.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

VISCOUNT BERTIE OF THAME

I apologise to the noble Marquess. My remarks were meant for this Amendment, when I intervened a few moments ago and said that the title would require alteration.

EARL HOWE

The interests for which I speak are very much concerned at this proposed reallocation of the areas, and certain associations have already protested against the proposal. Objections have been made by local operators. I would like to point out to your Lordships that the Southern Traffic Area comprises the Counties of Oxford, Berkshire, Wiltshire, Dorset, Hants, the Isle of Wight, and part of Bucks. This area, I submit to your Lordships, is found to be very convenient from the point of view of operators, and the administration of public service vehicles in the area on the whole has been extremely good and economical. The new arrangement involves adding parts of this area to the South-Eastern, Western and East-Midland Areas, which will not be nearly so convenient for the operators concerned, and certainly not any cheaper.

I submit to your Lordships that the work of the Southern Area now in progress will suffer considerable dislocation as a result of any such change. The Minister, as I think the noble Marquess has already pointed out, at first intended to make the alteration by Order-in-Council, and it is provided by Act, of Parliament that such Order must lie on the Table of each House for twenty-eight days. The Minister made an Order with reference to this matter on July 25, before both Houses rose, and time is now running out, but will not expire before the end of the present Session. Consequently the Order would have to be made again in the new Session, and the twenty-eight days will not expire till after the Christmas Recess. The operators affected object strongly to the matter being rushed, by adding a clause to the Bill at the end of its progress through Parliament. They wish to have the full time for laying objections which they had under the procedure of the proposed Order. In effect the proposal which the noble Marquess has laid before us curtails the statutory period which Parliament in its wisdom has provided for objections to be laid. I submit that before we pass this new clause we ought to ask for further explanation from the noble Marquess.

LORD PONSONBY OF SHULBREDE

I cannot help feeling that there is a good deal in what the noble Earl has said in protest, with regard to this clause. The clause has appeared only within the last few days, and I think that so drastic an alteration ought to be before Parliament for some little time, in order that the interests concerned, and members of both Houses, should have time to consider it. It is really undesirable that such a great alteration of the Bill, which Lord Bertie of Thame thinks would need an alteration of the title, should be introduced by a side-wind, within three days of the end of the Session, and without adequate time for discussion. I listened to the statement which the noble Marquess made, and I did not hear any really strong argument why the Southern Area should be abolished. I think we ought to know whether the local authorities of the Southern Area are satisfied with the alteration; whether the alteration is due to any break-down, or to the unsatisfactory character of the administration of the traffic in that area; whether, indeed, there is anything except mere economy on the side of the change; and whether efficiency is being sacrificed to a rather petty economy. I agree with the noble Earl that we have not had sufficient explanation of so drastic a change.

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR WAR (VISCOUNT HAILSHAM)

May I be allowed to give an explanation, and I agree that some explanation is necessary. It is not quite accurate to say that this is a change suddenly sprung upon Parliament. The truth of what happened is that under the Act of 1930 there can be a redistribution by Order-in-Council. That has to lie on the Table of each House for twenty-eight sitting days. In fact this alteration was made by Order-in-Council on July 25, and but for the accident that there are not twenty-eight sitting days between July 25 and January 1 it would have come into force by January 1; but in the result it would come into force, if we did nothing, some time later on—indeed it might run into February if we had such a vacation as no doubt the noble Lord opposite and I would like to enjoy. That, however, will not do, because the goods-licensing plans which are embodied in the present Bill come into force on January 1, and you must have got, therefore, the redistribution effected by that time.

In those circumstances, although it is true we are putting it into the Bill at a late stage—for which I am sorry, because apparently the Ministry had not realised that twenty-eight Parliamentary days would not have been properly used by the time that the Christmas Recess arrived—we are not making a new proposal at the last moment. We are making a proposal which already Parliament has said can be done by Order-in-Council, with regard to which an Order-in-Council has been made—and published, of course—many months ago, and in regard to which therefore there has been ample time to consider the point in behalf of those interested. The question is an important one because of the enormous and unwieldy size to which the Metropolitan Area has grown—it has nearly wiped out the South-Eastern Area—and which has rendered it imperative to have some reallocation of the Southern Area in order to make the different areas at all workable and convenient. Those are the reasons for the provision which your Lordships are asked to embody in this Bill, and I should like to say, with regard to the noble Viscount, Lord Bertie, that as usual he is quite accurate when he says that it will involve an alteration of the title of the Bill, which we shall have to make later on.

EARL HOWE

I do not gather that the noble and learned Viscount contests the statement I made just now that the statutory Parliamentary time allowed, twenty-eight days, has in effect been curtailed. I quite realise the force of what he has said, but at the same time I should like to consult further with my friends, and, if necessary, put down something else on the Report stage.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY moved to insert the following new clause after the clause last inserted:

Extension of s. 63 (7) of the Road Traffic Act, 1930.

".—(1) The power of the Minister under subsection (7) of Section sixty-three of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, to appoint a person to act as deputy to the Chairman of the Traffic Commissioners for any traffic area in the case of the illness, incapacity or absence of the Chairman may be exercised also if the Minister considers that, owing to the number of applications under Part 1, of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, and under this Part of this Act, the duties to be performed by the Chairman (or any deputy appointed by reason of the illness, incapacity or absence of the Chairman) cannot conveniently or efficiently be performed by one person.

(2) A person appointed under this section shall he appointed upon such terms and conditions, including conditions as to the time which he is to devote to the duties of his office, as the Minister may determine, and shall act for the Chairman in such matters, whether arising under this Act or under the said Act of 1930, as the Chairman (or any deputy appointed by reason of the illness, incapacity or absence of the Chairman) may from time to time direct, or as the Minister may from time to time by general directions require, and for that pur- pose shall exercise and perform all the powers and duties of the Chairman.

(3) This section shall have effect with respect to the Metropolitan Traffic Area with the substitution of a reference to the Traffic Commissioner for that area for any reference to a Chairman of Traffic Commissioners."

The noble Marquess said: The Minister already has power under subsection (7) of Section 63 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, to appoint a person to act as deputy to the Chairman of the Traffic Commissioners for any traffic area, "in the case of illness, incapacity or absence." The object of the present clause is to enable the Minister to appoint a deputy on grounds other than those I have mentioned, that is, if the Minister considers that, owing to the number of applications under Part IV of the Road Traffic Act, 1930 (as regards the licensing of passenger services), and under the present Bill (as regards the licensing of goods services) the duties to be performed by the Chairman "cannot conveniently or efficiently be performed by one person." The deputy so appointed would be in a position to act for the Chairman in matters arising either under the Road Traffic Act, 1930, or under the present Bill. The pressure of work will be so great, when the present Bill comes into operation, in some of the traffic areas, in particular the Metropolitan Area and in some of the areas covering the industrial districts in the North and the Midlands, that it may prove necessary to appoint a deputy, as a temporary measure at any rate, to assist the licensing authority. The volume of work that will follow the bringing into operation of the present Bill cannot be estimated with any accuracy and it is desirable that the Minister should have this power of providing relief to the licensing authority rather than that there should be any risk of a breakdown.

Amendment moved— After Clause 24 insert the said new clause.—(The Marquess of Londonderry.)

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM: I understand that the next clause raises matters of controversy. Probably, therefore, this might be a convenient point to move that the House do resume.

Moved, That the House do now resume.—(Viscount Hailsham.)

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House resumed accordingly.