Lords Sitting of 1 May 1951

Preamble
The House met at half past two of the clock, The LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers
  HUMBER CONSERVANCY BILL
  Read 3a (with the Amendments), and passed, and returned to the Commons.
  UTTOXETER URBAN DISTRICT COUNCIL BILL [H.L.]
  Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.
  BAPTIST AND CONGREGATIONAL TRUSTS BILL [H.L.]
  Read 3a, and passed, and sent to the Commons.

  SCHOOLS IN NEW TOWNS
  2.37 p.m.
  VISCOUNT ALLENBY: My Lords, I beg to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.
  [The Question was as follows:
  To ask His Majesty's Government whether they are satisfied that educational facilities are promptly available for all children on arrival in new towns, and, if not what is (a) the maximum, and (b) the average period of delay; and what steps are being taken to remedy it.]
  LORD SHEPHERD: My Lords, I have been asked to reply. A sufficiency of new school accommodation is included in the overall plans for all new towns, and in general it has so far been found possible to meet the requirements for school accommodation. While everything possible is done to keep school building and housing in step, houses can be erected much more quickly than schools and, exceptionally, it may be necessary to make temporary arrangements for the accommodation of the children until the permanent schools can be made ready for them.
  THE EARL OF PERTH: Arising out of that reply, will the noble Lord say whether
  570
  we can take it for granted that the provisions of the Education Acts which lay down that the wishes of the parents must be taken into consideration in the matter of the education of their children will be taken into account?
  LORD SHEPHERD: Certainly.
  THE MARQUESS OF READING: My Lords, does the answer given to my noble friend Lord Allenby mean that sufficient accommodation is provided at the present moment to enable all the children to have schooling?
  LORD SHEPHERD: Yes. In circumstances where it is clear that permanent accommodation will not be ready, the local education authorities make the necessary provision for temporary accommodation.
  LORD HAWKE: Will the noble Lord confirm that that applies to Crawley new town?
  LORD SHEPHERD: My Lords, the noble Lord may be aware that, in the case of Crawley, a new primary school was commenced in March last for about 600 pupils. He may also be aware that very shortly work will begin on a new secondary school to accommodate 450 pupils. In the meantime, temporary arrangements are to be made, but I am informed that there are at present vacant places in one of the Church of England primary schools, and it is hoped that accommodation for some of the children will be found there.

  COURTS-MARTIAL (APPEALS) BILL
  Brought from the Commons; read la: and to be printed.
  ABERDEEN CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS' WIDOWS' FUND ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL
  Considered on Report (according to Order).
  EDINBURGH CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS ANNUITY &c. FUND ORDER CONFIRMATION BILL
  Considered on Report (according to Order).

  FORESTRY BILL [H.L.]
  2.41 p.m.
  Amendments reported (according to Order).
  Clause 1 [Duty of Commissioners]:
  THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (THE EARL OF LISTOWEL)THE JOINT PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES (THE EARL OF LISTOWEL) moved to add to the clause:
  "() In relation to the performance of their general duty under this section, the Commissioners shall from time to time, and as a general rule not less than quarterly, consult with the Home Grown Timber Advisory Committee."
  The noble Earl said: My Lords, the object of this Amendment is to meet a point raised during Committee stage by the noble Earl, Lord De La Warr. The Amendment places the Commissioners under a statutory obligation to consult with the Home Grown Timber Advisory Committee. Consultation will no longer be an optional matter, and they will be under an obligation to consult on all appropriate occasions with the Central Advisory Committee. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 1, line 9, at end insert the said subsection.—(The Earl of Listowel)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 2:
  Restriction of felling
  (2) No licence shall be required under this section—

  (b) in respect of the felling of trees of a diameter not exceeding three inches or. in the case of coppice or underwood, of a diameter not exceeding six inches;

  (g) in respect of the felling by any person of trees of which he is the owner, so long as—

  (i) the aggregate cubic content of the trees which are felled by that person with-out a licence (exclusive of trees the felling of which without a licence is authorised by any other provision of this Act) does not exceed two hundred and seventy-five cubic feet in any month; and

  (ii) the aggregate cubic content of the trees so felled which are sold by that person whether before or after the felling (exclusive as aforesaid) does not exceed fifty cubic feet in any month, or such larger quantity as the Commissioners may in any particular case allow.

  (4) Regulations made by the Commissioners under this Act—
  (b) may restrict or suspend the exception contained in paragraph (g) of that subsection; and in particular may direct that the said paragraph shall have effect as if for the reference to two hundred and seventy-five or fifty cubic feet there were substituted a reference to such smaller quantity as may be specified in the regulations.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL THE EARL OF LISTOWEL moved, in subsection (2), after paragraph (f) to insert:
  "() in respect of the felling by any person of trees of a diameter not exceeding four inches of which he is the owner, where the felling is carried out in order to improve the growth of other trees and the trees are required for the purpose of fencing or other purposes of agriculture of forestry on land in the occupation of the person by whom they are felled or of any tenant of his; "
  The noble Earl said: My Lords, the object of this Amendment is to meet a point raised by the noble Earl, Lord Haddington, during the Committee stage. He said—and I think his views were shared by a number of noble Lords who were particularly conscious of the position in Scotland—that he thought that, for estate purposes, fences required to be made of good strong posts, of more than three inches in diameter. We appreciate the need for estate owners and farmers to be able to provide themselves with adequate fencing and gates, and with other requirements which they may want for their properties. We have therefore put down this Amendment, which exempts from the licensing provisions trees which are more than three inches but not more than four inches in diameter, providing, of course, that they are thinnings taken from a plantation and that they are required for use for estate purposes. I hope that the noble Earl feels that this meets his point. I am much obliged to him for raising a matter which is obviously one of general interest and concern to a number of farmers and estate owners. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 2, line 18, at end insert the said paragraph.—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  THE EARL OF HADDINGTON: My Lords, I should like to express my thanks to the noble Earl for this Amendment. So far as I can see, it meets the point which I and other noble Lords were pressing on the Committee stage.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL THE EARL OF LISTOWEL moved in subsection (2) after paragraph (f) to insert:
  "() in respect of the felling of any tree where the felling is immediately required for the purposes of carrying out development authorised by planning permision granted or deemed to be granted under the Town and Country Planning Act, 1947; "
  The noble Earl said: My Lords, the object of this Amendment is to meet a point which was made by the noble Lord, Lord Hylton, during the Committee stage of the Bill. I am much obliged to him for raising it. I hope that by this Amendment we have been able to satisfy his requirements. It provides that when permission has been granted for any development, whether by the local authorities or by a general development order made by the Minister of Local Government and Planning, the felling of any trees which must be cut down to enable the development to take place will not require a licence. Of course, the felling must be "immediately required." In the case of a long-term development, it would be unreasonable to exempt from the licensing provisions trees which might not have to be cut down for a number of years. The object of the Amendment is to exempt from those provisions any trees standing in the way of the immediate development of the property, and to enable those trees to be felled without having to seek permission from the Forestry Commission. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 2, line 18, at end insert the said paragraph.—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is a consequential Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 2, line 36, leave out ("paragraph (b) or (g) of ").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment also is consequential. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 2. line 38, after ("inches") insert ("or four inches").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 3:
  Felling licences
  (4) In dealing with an application for a licence in respect of any trees the Commissioners shall have regard to any plan of operations or working plan relating to the trees which has been approved by them, whether in pursuance of a forestry dedication covenant under the Forestry Act, 1947, or otherwise; and no conditions shall be imposed on the grant of a licence authorising the felling of trees on land which is subject to such a covenant as aforesaid.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment is consequential on some Amendments which come later. As they have been agreed in principle with noble Lords opposite, I think I can safely ask your Lordships to approve this consequential Amendment now. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 3, line 31, leave out from ("to") to ("but") in line 38 and insert ("any such conditions as are authorised by this section;"). —(The Earl of Listowel.)
  EARL DE LA WARR: My Lords, we agree to this Amendment.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment is purely drafting. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 3, line 42, leave out ("representations made") and insert ("advice tendered to them").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL THE EARL OF LISTOWEL moved, after subsection (2) to insert:
  ("() The Commissioners may grant a licence under this section subject to such conditions as, after consultation with the applicant, they may determine to be expedient for securing the re-stocking or stocking with trees of the land on which the felling takes place or of such other land as may be agreed upon between the Commissioners and the applicant, and the maintenance of such trees in accordance with the rules and practice of good forestry for a period not exceeding ten years.")
  The noble Earl said: My Lords, this Amendment is put down to meet a point that was made with considerable force by the noble Earl, Lord Airlie, during the Committee stage of the Bill. The object of the Amendment is to make it quite clear that the powers of the Commissioners will not relate to the management of the woodlands, as they would have done under the original wording of the

  575
  clause, but merely to restocking and maintenance. The Amendment makes it clear that the conditions which will be attached to a licence, and which will subsequently give rise to permission by the Commissioners, will be only conditions about the replanting of woodlands and the proper maintenance of the trees thus planted. I think your Lordships will agree that this will avoid any danger that the Commissioners will be authorised under this Bill to do more than they need in order to exercise legitimate responsibilities. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 3, line 44, at end insert the said subsection.—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  VISCOUNT GAGE: My Lords, I think I, too, had something to do with this Amendment, which seems to me entirely to meet the case I made about the alternative land which can be agreed upon between the owner and the Commission. I am grateful to the noble Earl.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  2.51 p.m.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL THE EARL OF LISTOWEL moved, after subsection (2) to insert:
  "() Where at the time of an application for a licence under this; Act authorising the felling of any trees any order is in force by virtue of regulations having effect under the Supplies and Services (Transitional Powers) Act, 1945, under which the licence of any Government Department is required for the use or consumption of timber comprised in the trees, then if the application contains a certificate by the applicant that the timber is required for purposes of agriculture or forestry on land in the occupation of the applicant or of any tenant of his, the application shall be treated for the purposes of the said order as if it were an application for a licence there-under authorising the use and consumption of the timber for those purposes."
  The noble Earl said: My Lords this Amendment has also been put down after considerable discussion with noble Lords opposite, and after an agreement in principle about what both sides wanted to do. The effect of the Amendment is to limit the estate owner to making one application in respect of both the licence for felling and for permission from the Board of Trade which he will have to get if he wants to use the sawn timber for estate purposes. Hitherto, he has had to make two applications, having to apply separately to the Commissioners and to the Board of Trade. This Amendment will mean that only one application will
  576
  have to be made to the Commissioners for felling permission, and that the rest of the procedure, the further permission that will have to be sought, will be dealt with by the one authority, from which he will receive consent or otherwise. I think this procedure will save owners a great deal of work and time; it will save a lot of unnecessary effort, and we hope that it will meet their convenience. At the same time, I think your Lordships will agree that, while timber remains in such short supply, it is not unreasonable that the Board of Trade should keep an eye on the use which is to be made of softwoods, and this Amendment applies only to softwoods.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 3, line 44, at the end insert the said subsection.—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  EARL DE LA WARR: My Lords, the point of view that has been expressed from this side of the House is that timber which is needed for the proper repair and maintenance of an estate should not be subject to licence at all. We still maintain that that is the logical point of view to adopt. On the other hand, although the noble Earl opposite has not been able to meet us on that point, he has certainly done something to clear up the complications in the existing machinery. At present we have to apply not only for a licence to fell but also for a licence to use the timber, and under this new clause there will be only one application. I wonder whether the noble Earl can help me in connection with a point of interpretation? Although there will be only one application for a licence, in fact the licence form which is returned to the Forestry Commissioners will have to be forwarded to the Board of Trade if the timber has to be sawn. Can the noble Earl tell me whether a large pole which is not sawn into planks, but which is only cross-sawn in order to regulate its length, will count as sawn? The noble Earl smiles, but I think there is a big point there in regard to estate management. It is an important matter from the point of view of forest owners who wish to use wood for estate purposes.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, I was not smiling because I did not appreciate that the matter was important; I smiled because it is a point upon which I have no instructions, and I am afraid it is impossible for me, without seeking

  577
  advice, to provide an answer to the noble Earl. I will, however, seek advice at the earliest opportunity, and will let the noble Earl know the answer.
  LORD ROCHDALE: My Lords, may I ask the noble Earl one further question on this Amendment? Obviously the Amendment will stop a great deal of trouble by way of procedure for wood-land owners. In the first Amendment that we have already passed at page 2, line 18, the noble Earl freed the posts for fencing. Supposing that, for convenience, an owner does not want to apply under this Amendment for a licence for the straining posts he will re-quire, but wishes to use some of his own softwood licensed out of his authorised 275 cubic feet. Does he still have to apply to the Board of Trade, as opposed to the Commission, for that permission to use? I am afraid that is a rather complicated matter, but it is an important point and, as the matter stands now, it seems to be rather untidy.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, I can speak again only by leave of the House. I will certainly give the most careful consideration to the noble Lord's point, and will see that it is replied to. I cannot answer him off-hand, but I will obtain the information and let him have it at the earliest possible moment.
  EARL DE LA WARR: My Lords, I can speak again only by leave of the House, but perhaps the noble Earl can clear up another point. At present large estates have an overall annual licence for timber to be used for estate purposes. Will that right to obtain an overall licence continue; and will it be on a twelve-monthly basis?
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, I can assure the noble Earl that, in so far as it is convenient for owners, the existing procedure will not be altered by this proposed Amendment. The noble Earl is talking about the twelve-monthly procedure which is convenient for owners. That will be altered only in this respect; that we hope it will add to their con-venience by having to make only one application instead of two.
  EARL DE LA WARR: It will be six months, and not twelve months?
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: If the present period is six months, then it will
  578
  not be altered by this Amendment. I can assure the noble Earl of that.
  VISCOUNT SWINTON: My Lords, I think the six-months' period is perfectly convenient, provided that the application is dealt with promptly. But what I think is important here, and what has not yet been raised in regard to having only one application for a licence instead of two, is that when any land owner who keeps up his estate properly—and it is of vital importance to-day that land owners should undertake proper maintenance of their buildings, and have proper fencing and repairs—applies for a licence, the licence will be granted rather as a matter of course where it is obviously for what I may call model estate management. By "model estate management" I do not in the least mean unnecessary expenditure. I do not believe that there is the faintest risk that any land owner will indulge in unnecessary expenditure. It costs a great deal of money to pay the wages of foresters and to pay for carting, and timber which is used for estate purposes is not used to make money. Nobody-can possibly sell a fraction of it in the black market. It is used for the best estate maintenance. What one would like is an assurance from the Government that applications made to the Forestry Commission will be considered sympathetically, on (he lines that where timber is genuinely to be used for estate management, then the land owner will be recognised as being the best judge of how much timber he is going to use.
  THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (VISCOUNT ADDISON): My Lords, I think I can give the noble Viscount that assurance. The provision was framed with that intention.
  VISCOUNT MERSEY: My Lords, I should like to thank the noble Viscount for that assurance and, at the same time, express the hope that applications for that class of use may be dealt with quickly.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, the next Amendment is purely a matter of drafting. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 3, line 46, leave out ("the").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is also a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 4, line 2, leave out ("consider expedient ") and insert ("determine").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is another drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 4, line 2, after ("notice") insert ("in writing").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is an Amendment which is consequential on the acceptance by the House of the new clause after Clause 9. As this clause has been agreed to in principle with noble Lords opposite—and, I hope, meets their views—I trust that I may be allowed to move this Amendment formally. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 4, line 6, leave out subsection (4).—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  LORD KINNAIRD LORD KINNAIRD had given notice of an Amendment, in subsection (4) to omit "trees on land which is subject to such a covenant as," and to insert "such trees." The noble Lord said: My Lords, I am not sure whether I am in order in moving this Amendment, as this subsection has now been deleted. The point I wish to make relates to undedicated woodlands. As your Lordships know, by the new clause after Clause 9, owners of dedicated woodlands will be given a licence to fell, with no conditions attached. In the case of woodlands that are undedicated, but which are managed to an approved plan, they will be given a licence but with con-ditions attached thereto. I may mention that my advisers in London have had a telegram from Edinburgh from an organisation of Scottish woodland owners saying that they would like to have my Amendment included. So, with the approval of many in Scotland—I have the support of the Secretary of the Scottish Land and Property Owners Federation—I put down this Amendment.
  Its object is that owners of well-managed undedicated woods and small woods shall not be penalised. I wonder
  580
  what justification is suggested for placing the owners of small woodlands in a position not so good as that of the owners of large woodlands. What would happen in the case of their applying? I suppose they might apply for a licence, be given one and then find a condition attached that they have to replant. As your Lordships all know, the cost of replanting is very considerable—£25 an acre, perhaps. The small woodland owner already receives no maintenance grant, whereas the big woodland owner gets a maintenance grant to help him after his planting. The type of man of whom I am speaking does, it is true, receive a cost grant for planting of about £12 an acre, but that still leaves him with a very large sum to find. What is the result? Probably he has to say that if the condition is imposed for replanting he will be unable to accept the permission to fell. I should like to know what the position of the small woodland owner will be in these circumstances. The Government want wood, and it may be that, owing to the imposition of such a condition as I have suggested, they will not get some which they otherwise would have because the woodland owner cannot meet the cost of replanting. The noble Marquess, Lord Salisbury, when we discussed this matter earlier, drew attention to the way in which the Bill was developing and to the fact that the small land-owner was getting rather left out in the cold. I think that this is a point which ought to be considered. If the Government would agree to accept the principle of this Amendment, your Lordships could insert into Clause 9, when we come to it, an Amendment to say that undedicated but approved woodlands as well as dedicated woodlands would be included in the granting of licences without conditions.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR (VISCOUNT JOWITT): My Lords, I am bound to point out that the noble Lord is proposing to alter a subsection which is now no longer part of the Bill. He may be able to move his Amendment on Clause 9, or on Third Reading. I think he will agree that no Amendment can be inserted in subsection (4), because subsection (4) is no longer part of the Bill.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, would it not be an appropriate moment for the noble Lord to move his Amendment on the Motion that the new

  581
  clause stand part of the Bill? It would then be possible, I suggest, for the noble Lord to raise his point on the new clause.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: I cannot put the Amendment now, as subsection (4) is no longer part of the Bill.
  LORD KINNAIRD: My Lords, I have said what I wish to say on this Amendment, and perhaps I may be allowed to put it down at an appropriate moment later.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, I will certainly reply to what the noble Lord has said.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL THE EARL OF LISTOWEL moved, after subsection (4) to insert:
  "() Unless within three months after the receipt of an application under this section (or, where a notice is given by the Commissioners within that period under subsection (3) of this section, within three months after the date on which the person entitled to such interest in the land as is mentioned in the notice is joined as a party to the application) the Commissioners give notice to the applicant of their decision on the application (including any reference of the application under section twelve of this Act), the provisions of this Act shall apply in relation to the application as if the licence to which it relates had been refused."
  The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is an Amendment which has been put down to meet the point raised by the noble Earl, Lord Airlie, during the Committee stage of the Bill. He suggested in an Amendment which he put forward that if an application for a licence to fell was not either refused or granted within eight weeks, then it should be taken by the owner as having been refused. In reply to the noble Earl, I suggested that a longer period might be reasonable in order to give the Commissioners time to think over the matter, and to consult with the various people with whom they will have to consult. The noble Earl was willing—if I did not misunderstand him —to accept a rather longer period in order to give the Commissioners sufficient time to consider an application. What I am proposing in this Amendment is that if an application is not decided upon within three months, it should be taken as having been refused. I think that is reasonable from the point of view both of the Commissioners and of the applicant. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 4, line 13, at end insert the said subsection.—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment is again consequential on the new clause after Clause 9. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 4, line 17, leave out subsection (6).— (The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  3.9 p.m.
  Clause 4:
  Review of refusal or conditions of licence
  (5) No request may be made under this section in respect of a refusal to grant a licence under this Act authorising the felling of any trees unless a previous application for such a licence has been refused and the application to which the request relates is made after the following date, that is to say—
  (b) in any other case, the third anniversary of the first previous application relating to the trees.
  LORD KINNAIRD LORD KINNAIRD moved, in subsection (5) (b) to leave out "third" and insert "second" [anniversary]. The noble Lord said: My Lords, I do not think the point with which I sought to deal in my last Amendment—which I have not moved—is covered, but I am advised that the wording of my Amendment is not correct, so I have not persisted with it. With regard to this Amendment, the point is the same one that we made before. During the Committee stage of the Bill I suggested that one should have the right to appeal at once in the event of the refusal of a licence. The noble and learned Viscount who sits on the Woolsack said that he was not particularly wedded to a term of three years, and emphasised the point that some other period would be considered if it were suggested. From further inquiry that I have made, I am still of the opinion that if there is a right of appeal for three years after an application is made, it will immensely in-crease the number of applications. I know that an owner can appeal every year, but I think that when an owner asks for the advice of his factor it seems common sense for the factor to say that he had better put in an application at once, and so begin to get rid of the three

  583
  years' wait. It would also be to the interest of the Forestry Commissioners, who deal with these applications, to try to reduce the number. In view of what the noble and learned Viscount the Lord Chancellor said on Committee stage, I hope that he is still willing to reconsider a shorter wait. Accordingly, I have put forward two years instead of three. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 5, line 33, leave out ("third") and insert ("second").—(Lord Kinnaird.)
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, I should have a great deal of sympathy with the noble Lord's proposal if it would relieve the owners of any hardship, but perhaps the noble Lord has overlooked this: that supposing an owner makes an application, and it is refused, there is nothing to prevent him from going back in a year's time and making another application. I am advised that a good many of the applications turned down the first time will be granted within the three-year period, and in that event it would be entirely unnecessary for the owner to be able to appeal against a refusal before the three years' period has elapsed. Moreover, the Amendment would impose a great deal of unnecessary work on the appeal committees. I understand that the principle on which the Forestry Com-missioners work is that a licence is granted as soon as it is possible to fit an application into the quota. It is not unreasonable that a period of three years should be given before the owner feels he is not likely to get what he wants and applies to the appeal committee. In view of that consideration, which I think the noble Lord has probably overlooked, he may be willing to reconsider his argument.
  LORD KINNAIRD: My Lords, I do not wish to press this Amendment, and I beg leave to withdraw it.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Clause 5 [Compensation for loss through refusal of licence]:
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment is consequential on the Amendments to Clause 12. Again, the principle of Clause 12 has been agreed with noble Lords opposite and it remains for the House to decide whether they agree with it. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 6, line 19, leave out ("of subsection (3)").—(The Earl of Litowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 6 [Power to make loans on refusal of licence]:
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment is consequential on the new clause after Clause 9. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 6, line 31, leave out paragraph ("a"). —(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 7:
  Felling directions
  7.—(1) If it appears to the Commissioners that it is expedient in the interests of good forestry or for purposes connected with their duty under section one of this Act that any growing trees should be felled—

  (a) in order to prevent deterioration or further deterioration in the quality of the timber comprised therein; or

  (b) in order to improve the growth of other trees,

  they may give directions to the owner of the trees requiring him to fell them within such period being not less than two years after the directions have become operative as may be specified in the directions:
  Provided that, in considering whether to give any directions under this subsection, the Commissioners shall take into account the interests of agriculture and the amenity or convenience of any farm or dwelling-house and any representations made by the Regional Advisory Committee for the conservancy in which the trees are growing.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment is purely drafting. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 7, line 6, leave out ("take into account") and insert ("have regard to").— (The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  LORD KINNAIRD LORD KINNAIRD moved, in the proviso to subsection (1), after "dwelling-house "to insert" or the policies thereof." The noble Lord said: My Lords, on this point I should be prepared to accept an assurance from the Government. As noble Lords are aware, the nearest definition in England of "policies" is "park." There is little difference, except in origin, between policies and park. On making inquiries, I was told that in interpreting the Bill in Scotland there

  585
  would be doubt about whether it referred to parks as that word is used in England. A park in Scotland is a piece of land enclosed with a fence either for cultivation or for grazing—that is, it is a field. If that were the interpretation given in Scotland to this clause, and to a further Amendment referring to "or park occupied therewith," there might be confusion.
  As I shall not be allowed to speak again, I should like to make this point. I wonder what is the meaning of the words "occupied therewith"? Many parks contain home farms and a large amount of grazing land as well as woodlands, and these are let under different forms of tenancies. I do not think there will be any difficulty in an annual tenancy, but some parks are let on a seven-year rotation and some home farms are let under lease to a tenant, and I doubt whether these would be included in the words "or park occupied there-with." As this is a Government Amendment, I hope they will give thought to the word "occupied." The words in my Amendment, "or the policies thereof," have no confusion about occupier. If the Government can assure me that "park" will be interpreted in Scotland as meaning the same thing as "park" in England, and that if a park is let it will not be ruled out because somebody else is occupying it, I shall be satisfied and will withdraw my Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 7, line 8, after ("dwelling-house") insert ("or the policies thereof").—(Lord Kinnaird.)
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, the noble Lord has raised two important points. I am obliged to him for raising these points, because it will enable the House to toe clear on the present interpretation of what is proposed in the Bill. I am advised that the word "park" includes the Scottish "policies" and that policies will be covered in the same way as parks in England. As there seems to be some difference on this point between legal advice in Scotland and legal advice in Whitehall, I will look into the matter again, and if there is any shadow of doubt I will include either the word "policies" or other words to the same effect. The noble Lord's other question was whether a park would be covered, whether let or in the occupation of the
  586
  owner of the land. I am advised that the Bill as drafted covers the case of a park whether let to a tenant or in the hands of the owner of the land. I am obliged to the noble Lord for raising these points, because they are important and I am anxious to meet what he wants.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, may I make a suggestion about this matter? We all wish that policies should be covered. "Policies" clearly means the same as "park" and I think it would be offensive to Scottish sentiment if we used only the English expression. May I suggest how the difficulty might be overcome? It should be made clear in the Interpretation Clause that "park" is synonymous with the word "policies" in Scotland. In that way it would be unnecessary to alter the wording of this clause; it would be covered by the later reference.
  LORD KINNAIRD: My Lords, I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL THE EARL OF LISTOWEL moved, in the proviso to subsection (1) to leave out the second "and" and to insert:
  "or park occupied therewith or of any land held inalienably by the National Trust, and shall take into account "
  The noble Earl said: My Lords, the object of this Amendment is to meet an important point that was raised by several noble Lords opposite during the Committee stage of the Bill. The Amendment would oblige the Commissioners to take into consideration the amenity aspect of a park or national trust land before issuing a felling direction. They are obliged under the clause as it stands to take into consideration agricultural interests and also the amenity aspect of a farm or dwelling-house. This Amendment adds to the amenity considerations which they must consult before they make up their minds parkland or land held in perpetuity by the National Trust. In addition, of course, there will be the further safeguard that if, in spite of the consideration of these objections, the Commissioners decide to issue felling directions, there will be an appeal which the owner can make to the appeal committee from the carrying out of these directions. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 7, line 8, leave out ("and") and insert the said new words.—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  EARL DE LA WARR: My Lords, this Amendment goes some way to meet the point raised by various noble Lords, including myself, on the Committee stage. We rather hoped that we could secure complete exception for these areas but, for reasons given by the noble Earl opposite on the Committee stage, we are satisfied that this is probably as far as we can ask him to go. I am glad that he mentioned the point that, if there is any doubt as to whether the Forestry Com-mission have taken sufficient account of the amenity, either of parks or National Trust areas, then the matter can go to the appeal committee. That is dealt with in the Amendment to Clause 8, at page 8, line 4. I should like to underline one point which seems to me important. On the last Amendment the noble Earl said that the words "occupied therewith "did not make an exception of land that is let. I feel that this point is important, particularly in connection with the campaign to increase food production. Obviously one wants the best use made of these farms, and often the owner of the mansion house is not in the best position in regard to food production and would be better advised to let. That point is covered by the Amendment.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, the wording means something quite different. I would only suggest to the Government that they might look at the matter again, because the word "there-with" seems clearly to mean that it is part of the single unity with the house. The case which the noble Earl, Lord De La Warr, had in mind was that of the man who has a house in the park and, in the interests of agriculture, lets his park temporarily to a farmer. It remains essentially part of the policies of the household, or the park of the house; but temporarily it is let separately. I cannot feel that "occupied therewith" correctly describes that position.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, I can speak again only with the per-mission of the House. We are all aiming at the same thing. There is no difference of opinion between us here, and it is simply a matter of finding the right words. I am advised that the owner, even if he let grazing to a farmer, would still own the woods, and to that extent would have a foothold in the park. In that way the tree area can be covered by this
  588
  wording. But I shall be glad to look at it again, and if we have not found the right wording I will put down an Amendment on Third Reading, which is allowed in your Lordships' House.
  LORD DE L'ISLE AND DUDLEY: My Lords, this is a matter of some importance, and I should like to declare my own interest. I own a park which I hope, in the course of time, to reclaim for agriculture. It has no defined areas of woodland, although there is a certain amount of timber in the park. It would be difficult to let part of the park without letting some of the ground on which timber grows. The timber area and the grazing in a park are often difficult to define. The word "occupation," as I understand it, is quite distinct from ownership. I would ask the noble Earl to consider this matter further before Third Reading, as "occupation" does not seem to cover the point. It is important, because if an owner decided to let land he might have to take this particular clause into consideration before doing so, and it might interfere with the full production of the land for agriculture.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, the next is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 7, line 8, leave out ("representations made ") and insert ("advice tendered").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment is consequential on the new clause after Clause 9. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 7, line 13, leave out from ("Act"') to end of line 15.—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is a long Amendment, but I will endeavour to summarise its effect. It does two things. In the first place it provides that there will be an appeal to the appeal committee against a case of felling directions on the ground that they are not expedient in the interests of forestry or for the maintenance of reserves. Secondly, it provides that the report which the appeal committee makes shall be binding on the Commission; that is to say, in this

  589
  respect, and in this respect only, so far as we are concerned at the moment, the appeal committee have the final word on the matter. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 7, line 19, leave out subsection (4) and insert—
  (" (4) If any person to whom directions are given under this section requiring the felling of any trees is aggrieved by the directions on the ground that the felling is not expedient as mentioned in subsection (1) of this section he may by notice served within the prescribed time and in the prescribed manner request the appropriate Minister to refer the matter to a Committee appointed under subsection (2) of section four of this Act: and the provisions of the said section four shall apply in relation to any such request as they apply in relation to a request under subsection (1) of that section subject to the following modifications:—

  (a) subsections (4) and (5) shall not apply; and

  (b) the report of the Committee under subsection (3) shall be made to the person by whom the notice was served and to the Commissioners, and the Commissioners shall confirm, withdraw or modify the directions in accordance with the report.")—(The Earl of Listowel.)

  On Question, Amendment agreed to. Clause 8:
  Obligation to purchase land in certain cases
  8.—(1) If any person to whom directions are given under this Act claims that compliance with those directions would involve him in a net loss after taking into account any benefit arising therefrom in respect of other trees of which he is the owner, he may by notice given in the prescribed manner and within the prescribed period request the appropriate Minister to acquire his interest in the land affected by the directions.
  (2) Where such notice is given by any person and the appropriate Minister is satisfied, after affording to that person an opportunity of appearing before and making representations to a person appointed by the said Minister in that behalf, that compliance with the directions would involve the person who gave the notice in such loss as aforesaid, the said Minister shall certify accordingly; and thereupon the said Minister shall be deemed to be authorised to acquire the interest of that person in the land compulsorily under the Forestry Act, 1945, and to have served a notice to treat in respect thereof on the date of the certificate.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, the next Amendment is a consequential Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 7, line 30 after ("given") insert ("to the appropriate Minister").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL THE EARL OF LISTOWEL moved, in subsection (1) to leave out "request" and insert:
  "(a) require the Commissioners to buy the trees to which the directions relate; or
  (b) require."
  The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is an Amendment to meet a point raised by the noble Earl, Lord Airlie, in Committee. The clause as it stands would oblige the Commissioners, if their felling directions were to involve the owner in a financial loss and if the owner so desired it, to buy only the land. This Amendment, however, gives the owner the option to oblige the Commissioners, if they wish to proceed with their felling directions, either to buy the land or to acquire the trees. The owner may in some cases prefer to hand over the trees to the Commissioners and keep the land, and this Amendment gives him the option. I hope that this meets the views of the noble Earl, Lord Airlie, and other noble Lords who supported him, and will do full justice both to the owners and to the requirements of the Forestry Commissioners. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 7, line 31, leave out ("request") and insert—
  (" (a) require the Commissioners to buy the trees to which the directions relate; or
  (b) require ").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  3.30 p.m.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL THE EARL OF LISTOWEL moved in subsection (2) to leave out all words after "person," where that word first occurs, down to and including "thereupon," and to insert:
  "the appropriate Minister shall within the prescribed period after receiving it either—

  (a) accept the notice; or

  (b) refer the notice to a Committee appointed in accordance with subsection (2) of section four of this Act; or

  (c) revoke the directions to which the notice relates.

  (3) Subsection (3) of section four of this Act shall apply to any reference under this section as if for references to the person at whose request the reference was made there were substituted references to the person by whom the notice was given; and the report of the Committee shall be made to the person by whom the notice was given as well as to the appropriate Minister and shall state whether in the opinion of the Committee compliance with the directions would involve that person

  591
  in such loss as aforesaid, and if so what modification if any of the directions would be sufficient to avoid such loss.
  (4) Where the Committee report that compliance with the directions would not involve the said person in such loss as aforesaid, the notice shall be of no effect; but in any other case the appropriate Minister may, within the prescribed period after receiving the report, either—

  (a) accept the notice; or

  (b) revoke the directions; or

  (c) modify the directions in accordance with the report, according as he thinks fit.

  (5) Where a notice given by any person under this section is accepted by the appropriate Minister, the directions to which the notice relates shall cease to have effect and—

  (a) where the notice requires the Commissioners to buy the trees to which the directions relate, the Commissioners shall be deemed to have contracted with that person to buy those trees on the date of the acceptance of the notice at such price and on such terms (including terms as to the time within which the Commissioners may fell and remove the trees) as may in default of agreement be determined by the Lands Tribunal; and

  (b) where the notice requires the appropriate Minister to acquire the interest of the said person in the land affected by the directions."

  The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is another long Amendment to carry out the appeal provisions in the Bill as they have been agreed in principle during the earlier discussions we have had upon this subject. The Amendment provides that if there is a reference to the appeal committee, it will be the committee and not the Minister who will be responsible for deciding whether or not compliance with compulsory felling directions will involve the owner in a net financial loss. That is important, because it is another matter in which the appeal committee will have the last word, and in which there will be no reference from the appeal committee to the Minister. The Amendment goes on to say that if the committee decide that a net financial loss will be caused by these felling directions, then the Commissioners must take one of three courses of action: first, the felling directions will be proceeded with and the notice will be accepted—that means that the Minister must buy the land or the Commissioners must acquire the trees according to the request which the owner makes: or secondly, the Minister must revoke the directions which would cause the financial loss; or, thirdly, he
  592
  must modify those directions in accordance with the report of the appeal committee, so as to relieve the owner of his financial loss. I think this is reasonable, and I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 7, line 33, leave out from ("person") to ("the") in line 39 and insert the said new words.—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  EARL DE LA WARR: My Lords, this is a point about which we were extremely worried, as I think we made clear on the Second Reading of the Bill. We felt most strongly that there should be a place in this Bill where the appeal tribunal should be given the final word, and that, in fact, it should be an appeal tribunal and not merely an advisory committee. In both Clauses 7 and 8 the Government have put down Amendments to bring this about, and I should like to thank them for having done so.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment is consequential. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 7, line 43, leave out ("certificate") and insert ("acceptance of the notice").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment is also consequential. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 8, line 4, leave out from ("under") to ("an") and insert ("subsection (1) of this section requiring the appropriate Minister to acquire ").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment is also consequential. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 8, line 11, leave out ("reference in sub-section (2)") and insert (" second reference in paragraph (b) of subsection (5)").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is another consequential Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 8, line 15, leave out from beginning to (" shall ") in line 29 and insert—
  ("If within the prescribed period after receiving a notice or the report of a Committee

  593
  under this section the appropriate Minister has not taken any such action as is required by subsection (2) or subsection (4) of this section, as the case may be, the directions to which the notice relates ").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 9 [Proceedings in respect of felling directions]:
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 9, line 3, leave out from beginning to end of line 11 and insert ("until the conclusion of any proceedings under section seven or section eight of this Act in pursuance to the notice or request ").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR THE LORD CHANCELLOR moved, after Clause 9 to insert the following new clause:
  Special provisions for trees subject to forestry dedication covenants, etc.
  ".— (1) Where application is made for a licence under this Act in respect of trees on land which is subject to a forestry dedication covenant, no conditions shall be imposed on the grant of a licence in pursuance of the application; and no breach of such a covenant shall be deemed to have occurred by reason of anything done or omitted in consequence of the refusal of such a licence.
  (2) Where an application is made for a licence authorising the felling of trees in accordance with a plan of operations or other working plan approved by the Commissioners under such a covenant or otherwise approved by them in writing for the purposes of this section—

  (a) the Commissioners shall not refuse the licence unless the appropriate Minister certifies that, by reason of an Act of God or other emergency which has taken place or arisen since the approval of the plan, the granting of a licence in respect of those trees, or in respect of trees of any class which comprises those trees, would be detrimental to the national interest; and

  (b) if the licence is refused, the applicant may within the prescribed period serve on the Commissioners a notice in the prescribed form requiring them to buy the trees in respect of which the licence is refused, or such of those trees as may be specified in the notice.

  (3) Where a notice is served under sub-section (2) of this section in respect of any trees, section five of this Act shall not apply in relation to the trees and the Commissioners shall be deemed to have contracted with the applicant to buy the trees on the date of the service of the notice at such prices as may in default of agreement be determined by the Lands Tribunal, and shall fell and remove the trees at such time or times as they may determine.
  (4) An advance by way of loan may be made under section six of this Act in respect of any trees on land subject to a forestry dedication covenant, other than trees in respect of which a notice is served under subsection (2) of this section.
  (5) No directions shall be given under section seven of this Act in respect of trees on land which is subject to a forestry dedication covenant or of trees which are being managed to the satisfaction of the Commissioners in accordance with any such plan approved as aforesaid otherwise than under such a covenant."
  The noble and learned Viscount said: My Lords, I have been asked to say something about this clause. I must say that I think it amounts to a complete triumph for this House. In my time, I have known a good many Chancellors of the Exchequer of the Labour Party, the Liberal Party, the Conservative Party and no Party at all. I never thought in my wildest moments that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would agree to this clause. However, he has agreed it, and I thereupon offer my respectful congratulations to all those who have induced him so to do. This clause is another illustration of the fact that this Bill is now becoming a House of Lords Bill and not a Party Bill at all. It is a Bill which is being carried through its stages by the common consent of all concerned, including a large number of people who know a great deal about the subject.
  This new clause embodies the compromise proposed by the noble Duke, the Duke of Northumberland, and also certain drafting and other amendments, Briefly, it provides that licences shall not be refused for trees in dedicated woods or woods managed in accordance with a plan approved by the Commissioners, unless the Minister certifies that by reason of an Act of God or other emergency which has occurred since the approval of the plan, the grant of a licence would be detrimental to the national interest. We had some trouble about the word "emergency," but coupled with the words "Act of God" it seems to cover matters very well. The word "emergency" by itself might mean a war or something of that sort, but coupled with "an Act of God" it means all sorts of horrible events. Such a certificate could relate, of course, either to all trees in all such woodlands, to specific classes of trees or, indeed, to individual trees. If, after such a certificate has been given, a licence is refused,

  595
  the applicant may require the Commissioners to buy the trees at a price to be settled by the Lands Tribunal, in default of agreement, and the Commissioners may then fell them when they determine. Alternatively, a loan under Clause 6 may be paid in respect of trees in dedicated woods for which a licence has been refused, so long, of course, as no notice has been served calling upon the Commissioners to purchase. Owners of dedicated woodland are safeguarded against action by the Commissioners for any breach of the covenant caused by the refusal of a licence.
  Your Lordships will observe that this clause also provides that no conditions may be attached to a licence in respect of trees in dedicated woodlands, and that no directions may be imposed in respect of such trees, or trees in woods managed in accordance with an approved plan. I accordingly beg to move this new clause, and humbly submit my congratulations to all those who have been concerned in achieving this result.
  Amendment moved—
  After Clause 9, insert said new clause.— (The Lord Chancellor.)
  EARL DE LA WARR: My Lords, the noble and learned Viscount has been good enough to pay tribute to everyone connected with this Bill for the help and assistance they have given in arriving at this compromise. I should like to say, from this side of the House, that I think the noble and learned Viscount himself has done a great deal to contribute to this happy conclusion. There is one point about this clause which particularly pleases me and which the Lord Chancellor did not mention. Subsection (2) covers not only woods which are dedicated, but also woods which are operated under a plan of operations. We are particularly pleased to have those words included because we feel that they may help the smaller man who has woods which he is anxious to manage well but which are not sufficiently serious forestry propositions to be worthy of dedication. There-fore, the noble and learned Viscount, in putting forward this new clause, should feel that he also has made a contribution, not only to the owners of large scale forests, but also to the small man about whom we on this side of the House have been particularly concerned.
  3.40 p.m.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, perhaps it would be convenient for me to reply at this juncture to a point which was made by the noble Lord, Lord Kinnaird, on Clause 3. I promised him a reply, and I think that perhaps this is the most appropriate moment. Lord Kinnaird wanted owners of undedicated woodlands who managed them under an agreed plan of operation to be placed in the same position as dedicated woodland owners, so far as replanting is concerned.
  LORD KINNAIRD: So far as conditions are concerned.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: He wanted them to be exempt from the conditions which will ordinarily be attached to a felling licence and from which the dedicated woodland owner will be exempt under the Bill. I am afraid that we cannot accept his argument for grouping undedicated and dedicated owners together in this respect. Everyone agrees, I think, that replanting is essential for the building of adequate reserves of growing timber. Now, in the case of the dedicated owners the dedication agreement provides terms which make replanting almost inevitable. For example, if the dedicated owner does not replant, the Forestry Commissioners will be in a position to refuse any grant from public funds which the owner would otherwise get. They would always be in a position to take over the woods which have not been replanted, and to do the replanting. That is to say, in the case of dedicated owners the Forestry Commissioners are able to enforce replanting.
  But that is not what would happen in the case of an undedicated woodland owner who did not carry out his undertaking to replant under a plan of operations. His replanting depends entirely on his own personal promise; and on nothing else. Supposing there is a change of occupation, who could say that the next owner of an undedicated property would carry on the same plan of operations and carry out the replanting in the same way? There would be no guarantee of that. We consider it absolutely essential that the un-dedicated owner should be subject to the licensing conditions imposed under the Bill. I am sure that all who agree to the broad principle that we must have a reserve of growing timber will agree with the consequence: that people who might not otherwise replant should be obliged

  597
  to do so. I hope that this reply may, to some extent at any rate, satisfy the noble Lord, Lord Kinnaird.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, we are in rather an "Alice Through the Looking Glass" position. I understand that the noble Lord, Lord Kinnaird, has an Amendment on this point which he proposes to move. We have not yet had the Amendment, but we have had a powerful reply from the Government, though I do not know at what moment the Amendment will be moved. However, following upon what the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, has said, I should like to say a word. As I understand it, there are now three categories of people. First, there are those who dedicate their woods for ever; they have special advantages. Then there are the people who enter into an agreed scheme of operations, which is not permanent but which it must be hoped will endure; they do not get quite the same advantages. There are, finally, the people who for one reason or another have done neither. Obviously, the grant or refusal of a licence to them is a more formidable affair because they have not entered into any previous scheme or agreement with the Forestry Commission. In the case of the larger owners one accepts the fact that they are perfectly entitled to do what they like, though they must not expect the same advantages if they do not fit in with the national plan.
  What I am worried about is the very small man, and I think it is that class which is causing anxiety also to Lord Kinnaird. There might be a man who would like to dedicate, or if not to enter into an agreed scheme, and yet he has such a small amount of woodland that it might be hardly worth while for the Commission to enter into a scheme with him. The Forestry Commission may have explained to him that his woodland is not of sufficient interest from the forestry point of view. I do not know whether that has happened, but I conceive that it might. There is a man who has done his best to fit his arrangements into the national scheme, and it seems hard that he should not be included in subsection (2) (a) of the new clause. If he had had his own way he would have made an agreed plan, but he has not been able to do so for reasons which are not under his own control. I
  598
  did put this point to the noble Viscount the Leader of the House on the Committee stage, and he, as I should have expected, expressed sympathy. He could obviously do no more, however, and I do not know any way in which cases of that kind can be met. The larger owner is a man who can either dedicate or enter into an approved scheme, and if he decides to do neither that is a matter which puts him in rather a different position from the smaller people of whom I have been speaking.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 10 [Enforcement of conditions and directions]:
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 9, line 13, leave out ("by") and insert ("in accordance with").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is another drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 9, line 14, after ("licence") insert ("under this Act or with any directions given by the Commissioners under this Act").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is another drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 9, line 15, after ("conditions") insert ("or directions").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this again is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 9, line 17, after ("time") insert ("(not being less than the prescribed period after the giving of the notice)").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  3.48 p.m.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL THE EARL OF LISTOWEL moved to leave out subsection (2) and to insert:
  "(2) If any person to whom notice is given under subsection (1) of this section claims that the works in question have been carried out in accordance with the conditions or directions,

  599
  as the case may be, or that the steps specified in the notice are not required by the conditions or directions, he may, by notice served on the appropriate Minister in the prescribed manner within the prescribed period after the receipt of the notice under subsection (1) of this section, request the appropriate Minister to refer the matter to a Committee appointed in accordance with subsection (2) of section four of this Act, and the provision of that section (except subsections (4) and (5)) shall apply accordingly.
  (3) The appropriate Minister shall, after considering the report of the Committee on any such reference, confirm or cancel the notice to which the reference relates."
  The noble Earl said: My Lords, this again is a matter which was not originally included in the Bill, and is now proposed to meet the views expressed by noble Lords opposite. The Amendment will do two things. In the first place it provides that, if there is a dispute between the Forestry Commission and a woodland owner about whether works required by the conditions of the licence or by a felling direction have not been carried out, there may be an appeal by the owner to the appeal committee. The second thing it does is this: it provides that the appeal committee shall report to the Minister, whose decision shall be final—that is to say that in this respect, the Committee will not be acting as a quasi-judicial body but as an advisory body to the Minister, and he will have the final word. I bee; to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 9, line 23, leave out subsection (2) and insert the said new subsections.—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is a consequential Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 9, line 29, leave out ("subsection (2) of").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, here we have a number of consequential Amendments. I beg to move the first.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 9, line 35, after ("incurred") insert ("by any person").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this also is a consequential Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 9, line 36, after ("paid") insert ("by any person").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment also is consequential. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 9, line 37, leave out from ("shall") to end of line 41 and insert ("be deemed to be incurred or paid by that person—

  (a) where the notice relates to works required to be carried out in pursuance of conditions of a licence under this Act. For the use and at the request of the applicant or applicants for the licence;

  (b) where the notice relates to works required to be carried out in pursuance of directions under this Act. for the use and at the request of the person to whom the directions were given.").—(The Earl of Listowel.)

  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is a somewhat technical Amendment, but I think it is important because it protects a certain class of persons who would otherwise be unprotected. It gives the same protection to an agent or trustee as is provided in the Public Health Act, by limiting his liability to the amount of money he holds on behalf of the person for whom he is trustee or agent. It would be unfair that such a person should have an unlimited liability. This provision limits his liability in the way in which it is limited in other Statutes. It is common form. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 10, line 5, at end insert ("and section two hundred and ninety-four of the Public Health Act. 1936 (which limits the liability of owners of land in certain cases) shall apply for the purposes of this section as if for references to a council or the authority there were substituted references to the Commissioners and for the reference to that Act there were substituted a reference to this section.")— (The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 11 [Penalties]:
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment meets a point made by the noble Viscount, Lord Ridley, who is not here this afternoon. I told him on a previous occasion that I would try to meet him. This Amendment lowers the maximum fine from £50 to £10. I think it was the general view of the Committee

  601
  at the time that the fine originally proposed in the Bill was a little too high. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 10, line 9, leave out ("fifty") and insert ("ten").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  EARL DE LA WARR: My Lords, I am not authorised by the noble Viscount, Lord Ridley, to speak for him, but I am sure that he and other members of the House will feel that this is a great improvement.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment is consequential. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 10, line 14, leave out paragraph (a).— (The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 12:
  Provisions as to tree preservation orders
  12.—(1) Notwithstanding anything in a tree preservation order, a licence granted or directions given by the Commissioners under this Act after the date on which the order comes into force shall be sufficient authority for the felling of any trees to which the order relates; and no application shall be entertained under any such order for consent thereunder in respect of any felling for which such a licence is required under this Act.
  (2) Where application is made to the Com-missioners for such a licence in respect of any felling of trees for which consent is required under a tree preservation order, or where the Commissioners propose to give directions under this Act in respect of trees to which such an order applies, the Commissioners shall (unless in the case of an application for a licence they propose apart from the order to refuse the licence) consult the authority by whom the order was made in respect of the application or directions; and in dealing with any such application under section three of this Act the Commissioners shall have regard to the purposes of the tree preservation order as well as to the considerations mentioned in subsection (2) of that section.
  3.52 p.m.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL THE EARL OF LISTOWEL had given notice of several Amendments to Clause 12, the first being, in subsection (1), after "and" to insert "(except as provided by this section)." The noble Earl said: My Lords, with your Lordships' permission I shall speak on this first Amendment to all the Amendments to Clause 12. The whole series of Amendments proposed by the Government are aimed at carrying
  602
  out an undertaking given on an earlier stage of the Bill, when we said that we would study the clause with a view to redrafting it and improving it, in order that we might be certain of its carrying out what was intended. The object of these Amendments is to meet the view which was expressed in several parts of the House during the Committee stage, that the clause as drafted would enable the Forestry Commissioners, when someone applied to fell trees protected by a tree preservation order, to disregard the views of the local planning authority and issue a felling licence forthwith. That has never been our intention, and I am grateful to the noble Viscount, Lord Gage, and to other noble Lords, for pointing out that the wording of the clause was ambiguous and might give rise to a difficulty which we hoped to avoid.
  The Amendments which I shall move here require the Commission to refer to the Minister of Local Government and Planning an application for leave to fell which they wish to grant and which the local planning authority wish to be refused—that is to say, when there is a difference between the Commissioners and the local planning authority, the Minister will decide. The Minister will then treat the application as if it had been made to the local planning authority under the tree preservation order and as if he had directed the authority to refer it to him for a decision. The effect of these Amendments is to leave to the Minister of Local Government and Planning, as it is left at present, the final decision on an application to fell trees which are protected by a tree preservation order. At the same time, under Section 15 of the Town and Country Planning Act of 1947 both the applicant and the local planning authority are given the right to make representations to the Minister if they so desire, before he reaches his final decision. I am authorised to say that the Forestry Commissioners are quite satisfied by this solution of the problem. I hope that it will satisfy noble Lords opposite, because it makes absolutely plain that the last word will be spoken by the Minister of Local Government and Planning. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 10, line 31, after ("and") insert ("(except as provided by this section) ").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  VISCOUNT GAGE: My Lords, I think that in introducing the Bill on Second Reading the noble Earl said he did not fully understand this clause as drafted. Therefore, I may perhaps be forgiven for saying that I do not entirely understand the Amendment as drafted. But what I do understand will, I think, meet our point. Our basic objection to the original clause was that the Minister of Town and Country Planning, having made and con-firmed an order after a great deal of trouble, might find that it was upset by another Department. Now, as I understand the clause, the Minister of Town and Country Planning is the only person who can upset an order confirmed by him. So I take it that the Minister of Town and Country Planning is not likely to make original orders that are likely to interfere with the vital timber requirements of the country. Therefore, I think the scheme will work out in the way we originally hoped. I am grateful to the noble Earl, and on behalf of the County Councils Association I am authorised to say that they agree.
  LORD HYLTON: My Lords, I too should like to thank the noble Earl for his action on this clause. I am told that the procedure set out in the Amendments would have taken place anyhow, but I think it better (and I am sure many noble Lords will agree) that the actual words should be in the Bill, because so much legislation does not really describe what happens. The more that the actual facts and actions are described in the Bill, the better it is for the ordinary citizen who has to try to work and live under this modern legislation.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment is consequential, I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 10, line 34, leave out from ("Where") to ("such") and insert ("the Commissioners propose to grant").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this again is consequential. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 10, line 36, leave out from ("order") to ("the") in line 38— (The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment I have already spoken on. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 10, line 38, leave out from ("shall") to end of line 45 and insert (" give notice in writing of the proposal to the authority by whom the order was made; and, if within the prescribed period after the receipt of the notice the authority object to the proposal and the objection is not withdrawn, the Commissioners shall not deal with the application, but shall refer it to the Minister of Local Government and Planning.
  (3) Where an application for a licence is referred to the Minister of Local Government and Planning under subsection (2) of this section—

  (a) the provisions of the tree preservation order, and any provisions of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1947, relating to that order, shall apply as if the application were an application made under the order for consent for the felling of the trees and referred to the said Minister in pursuance of provisions of the order applying section fifteen of that Act, and if the order contains no such provisions as aforesaid it shall have effect for the purposes of this paragraph as if the said section fifteen were incorporated therein subject to such modifications as the said Minister may direct; and

  (b) if consent for the felling is given by the said Minister in pursuance of the application, no licence under this Act shall be required for the felling of any trees in accordance with the consent.").—(The Earl of Listowel.)

  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment, too, is consequential. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 11, line 1, leave out from beginning to ("such") in line 3 and insert—
  ("Notwithstanding anything in this section the Commissioners may, where application is made to them for a licence in respect of any"). —(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is another consequential Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 11, line 22, at end insert—
  ("() Where the Commissioners propose to give directions under this Act requiring the felling of any trees to which a tree preservation order applies, the Commissioners shall give notice in writing of the proposal to the authority by whom the order was made; and if within the prescribed period after the receipt of the notice the authority object to the proposal and the objection is not withdrawn, the Commissioners shall not give the directions except with the consent of the Minister of

  605
  Local Government and Planning, who shall, before deciding whether to grant or refuse to grant such consent, consult with the said authority").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 19 [Crown Land]:
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is another consequential Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 15, line 3, leave out ("management") and insert ("stocking").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 20 [Application to Scotland]:
  VISCOUNT ADDISON: This Amendment is of Scottish application. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 16, line 6, at end insert—
  ("(b) for any reference to the National Trust there shall be substituted a reference to the National Trust for Scotland;").— (Viscount Addison.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: This is another Amendment of Scottish application. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 16, line 11, at end insert—
  ("() for any reference to the Minister of Local Government and Planning there shall be substituted a reference to the Secretary of State;").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: I beg to move this consequential Amendment.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 16, line 13, leave out ("section") and insert ("sections fifteen and")—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: I beg to move this consequential Amendment.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 16, line 15, leave out ("section") and insert ("sections thirteen and").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: I beg to move this consequential Amendment.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 16, line 16, at end insert—
  ("() for any reference to the Acquisition of Land (Authorisation Procedure) Act,
  606
  1946, there shall be substituted a reference to the Acquisition of Land (Authorisation Procedure) (Scotland) Act, 1947;").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 21 [Transitional provisions]:
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this is a drafting Amendment. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 17, line 13, leave out from ("and") to end of line 17 and insert ("no conditions relating to the restocking or stocking of land shall be imposed on any licence granted pursuant to the application unless the person en-titled to such interest in the land as would enable him to comply with those conditions is a party to the application").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 22 [Financial provisions]:
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, I beg to move this drafting Amendment.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 17, line 23, leave out from ("Act") to ("such") in line 25.—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.
  Clause 23 [Interpretation]:
  THE EARL OF LISTOWEL: My Lords, this Amendment deals with amendments to the definition clause and is consequential on the inclusion of the words which they define in the Bill. As this is the last Amendment, I should like to take the opportunity of associating myself with my noble and learned friend on the Woolsack in thanking noble Lords opposite for the very friendly way in which they have helped to make this a good Bill. As the noble and learned Viscount has said, this is now a joint Bill: it is not merely a Government Bill; it is a House of Lords Bill. I am extremely grateful to all noble Lords who have either taken part in the discussions we have had, or have put down Amendments in this House, and for the way in which they have worked in making this Bill of lasting benefit to forestry. I beg to move.
  Amendment moved—
  Page 17, line 42, at end insert—
  (" 'forestry dedication covenant' has the meaning assigned to it by the Forestry Act, 1947;
  'National Trust' and ' held inalienably' have the same meanings as in the Acquisition of Land (Authorisation Procedure) Act, 1946;").—(The Earl of Listowel.)
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I rise to thank the noble Earl for what he has said. This is one of those Bills in connection with which we all really want the same thing. The only question between us at, all was that evidently there were slight differences in the angle of approach to the problem, and the object, as it should be in this House, was to try and bridge the gaps. On be-half of those who sit on these Benches, I should like to say that we are grateful to the Government for the co-operative spirit in which they have met us. We have had an extremely happy negotiation, sometimes rather hard fought but with no ill feeling of any kind, and I agree with what the noble Earl and the noble and learned Viscount have said: we have produced a much better Bill and one which, I think, is workable.
  On Question, Amendment agreed to.

  BRITISH OIL INTERESTS IN PERSIA
  4.4 p.m.
  VISCOUNT ADDISON: My Lords, it might be convenient if the noble and learned Viscount on the Woolsack took this opportunity of making a statement on Persia.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR: My Lords, this is a Statement which is being made by the Foreign Secretary in another place, probably at the present time.
  "The Anglo-Iranian Oil Company's Concession in Persia dates from 1911. In 1932, the late Shah threatened unilaterally to cancel the Concession, and His Majesty's Government took the matter to the Council of the League of Nations. As a result, the dispute was settled and in 1933 the present Concession was signed. It is valid until 1993, after which the company's assets in Persia would be transferred without payment to the Persian Government. Article 21 of this Concession provides that no change may be made in the position of the company under the Concession, even by legislation, except by agreement between the Persian Government and the company. Article 22 provides for recourse to arbitration in the event of a dispute between the Government and the company.
  "In 1948, changes in world conditions suggested that some modification
  608
  of the rates of payment made by the company to the Government might be justifiable, and the company therefore offered to negotiate, within the framework of the Concession, a revised agreement. After long negotiations, an agreement known as a "Supplemental Agreement" was signed in July, 1949. This Agreement was retroactive in character and under it the Persian Government would have received large in-creases of royalties per year. The Agreement was retrospective and, there-fore, would have produced immediately a large sum. This Agreement required ratification by the Persian Parliament (the Majlis), but neither the then Persian Government, nor their successors, were willing to recommend it to the Majlis for ratification until the late Mr. Razmara did so in October, 1950. At no time, however, was the Agreement, and the benefits which Persia would have derived under it, explained to the Majlis or to the Persian people, and uninformed opposition to it was consequently allowed free rein. The Oil Commission of the Majlis in due course reported that the Agreement was not in Persia's interest, and eventually Mr. Razmara found it necessary to with-draw it from the Commission.
  "The company then intimated to Mr. Razmara its willingness to discuss a new Agreement based, if he preferred it, on the principle of an equal share of profits in Persia. In the meantime, however, an extreme Rightwing group of deputies pressed a demand for complete nationalisation of Persia's oil industry. At this point, Mr. Razmara was murdered by a fanatic, and in the confusion arising out of his murder both the Majlis and the Senate were induced to pass a resolution accepting the principle of the nationalisation of the oil industry and giving the Oil Commission a period of two months in which to work out means of putting it into effect.
  "His Majesty's Government, who had been in close touch with the company and the Persian Government throughout the negotiations, on March 14 delivered a Note, which has since been published, to the Persian Government. The Persian Government on April 8 replied throwing doubt on the right of His Majesty's Government to intervene in a matter which they held

  609
  to be the concern only of themselves and of the company. His Majesty's Government cannot, of course, accept this contention.
  "All this background needs to be borne in mind if the present events are to be seen in their proper perspective. The present position is that on April 26 the Oil Commission produced a series of proposals. These have now been endorsed by the Majlis and Senate. They will then presumably become law. The full text of these proposals is not yet available, but they appear to provide for the assumption of control by the Persian Government over all the company's assets and operations in Persia, the revenues from which would be regarded as belonging to Persia. The proposals apparently contain some provision for compensation of the company, to be made by placing a proportion of these revenues in a bank, but these provisions are obscure. The effect of the proposals would seem to involve a complete change in the company's position as provided for in the existing Concession Agreement, which was made in 1933 and is valid until 1993. This change would, moreover, be made unilaterally, although the Concession Agreement itself provides that it should not be altered, even by legislative action, otherwise than by agreement with the company. As the House will be aware, the Persian Government under Mr. Hussein Ala resigned immediately after these proposals had been made known and before they had been voted upon by the Majlis. A new Government has now been formed by Dr. Musaddiq, the leader of the extreme Right-wing group of deputies known as the National Front.
  "I turn now to consideration of the issues involved in this development. During the past thirty years the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, on the strength of the contractual obligations into which the Persian Government entered with it, has made in Persia an immense investment, which must be assessed in terms not only of money but of scarce materials and technical skill. It has consequently built up an industry which forms the most important element, and the main stabilising factor, in Persia's economy. It has provided employment for many tens of
  610
  thousands of Persians, and has been the means of creating employment for many more. Through this employment many Persians have been able to acquire technical skills which could not otherwise have been available to them. Its record as an employer of labour has been a good one, and the conditions under which its employees live and work are not only far in advance of ordinary Persian standards but, as the International Labour Office have borne witness, compare favourably with those existing in any part of the Middle East. The benefits which it has been the means of conferring on Persia cannot, therefore, be measured in terms of money alone.
  "All these benefits are now placed in jeopardy. It must not be forgotten that the company's operations consist not only of extracting oil from the ground, but of the extensive refining operations undertaken in the great Abadan installations and in a wide-spread marketing organisation, including a great fleet of tankers. It would clearly be a matter of the greatest difficulty for the Persians, even if they were unilaterally to take over production themselves, to acquire the ability to operate and maintain installations. Furthermore, by taking over production, they could not acquire the company's world-wide marketing and distribution facilities, which they would find it even more difficult to replace. Any interruption of the company's operations would inevitably result in unemployment and a creation of just those conditions from which the Communists could profit. The recent disturbances in the Abadan area, which the Persian Government were obliged to repress with a firm hand, were, undoubtedly, of Communist inspiration, and are a timely reminder of their ability to fish in troubled waters.
  "I now wish to make clear His Majesty's Government's attitude in the matter. The United Kingdom has a long-standing friendship with Persia, whose political independence and territorial integrity we have consistently helped to preserve, and which remain a matter of deep concern to us. Persia's economic life is intimately linked with our own, as her Government well realise.

  611
  Our only desire is to see Persia strong, prosperous and independent, and to co-operate with her to these ends in so far as she may desire such cooperation. As I have shown, we consider that the continued operations of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company are vital to Persia's well-being, even as they contribute to our own. We recognise that Persia's evolution, to which we ourselves have contributed and are still contributing, has created a new situation in which it is natural and right that the Persian people should now take a greater share in the operation of their main industry. But we cannot admit that the contractual obligations under which the company has operated and has made this great investment in Persia can be abrogated unilaterally. Before Mr. Ala resigned, we had, with the full agreement of the company, authorised His Majesty's Ambassador at Teheran to put to him unofficially the lines on which we thought a satisfactory agreement between the Persian Government and the company could be worked out. In general terms, these were based on the principle of association between the Government and the company, and pro-vided for the transfer of the company's operations in Persia to a new British company on the board of which the Persian Government would be represented; for a progressive increase in the already great proportion of Persians employed by the company throughout its operations; and for an equal sharing of the profits of these operations between the Government and the new company. It was not possible for these suggestions to be pursued before the Oil Commission's new proposals were issued and the Ala Government resigned.
  "We are still most anxious to settle this matter by negotiation; but we can-not negotiate under duress. We do not, of course, dispute the right of a Government to acquire property in their own country, but we cannot accept that the company's whole position in Persia should be radically altered by unilateral action when the agreement into which the Persian Government freely entered with the company itself provides against such action. We have no wish that this question should become an issue between ourselves and our Persian friends,
  612
  and we are only anxious to sit down with them and work out a solution in a reasonable atmosphere. Our long standing ties of friendship with them and our many mutual interests, political as well as economic, convince us that such a solution can be found."
  4.16 p.m.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I should like to thank the noble and learned Viscount the Lord Chancellor for the full statement which he has made on behalf of the Government. I am afraid that this is, clearly, a very bad story indeed. It means unilateral repudiation of a solemn contract which was of extreme value not only to this country but to Persia herself. The noble and learned Viscount has not said—perhaps it was impossible for him to do so to-day —exactly what His Majesty's Government propose to do about it. I would only submit, with all diffidence, this view: that this Persian question is, clearly, a case where it is vital that His Majesty's Government should show that they are entirely determined to protect British interests in this important area. Weakness on an issue of this kind at a time like this would be fatal, and, in my view, might have very serious repercussions. I am quite certain that if His Majesty's Government show that they mean to act firmly—and, as I understand it, they have levers which they can use—they will receive the support of all Parties in this House, and, I have no doubt, throughout the country. I do not want to ask for any further information today, because, clearly, the time is not ripe for that. I hope, however, that we shall have information as early as possible as to the steps, diplomatic or otherwise, which His Majesty's Government propose to take.
  4.18 p.m.
  VISCOUNT SAMUEL: My Lords, on behalf of noble Lords on these Benches, I should like to join in thanking His Majesty's Government for the full statement which has just been made in your Lordships' House on a matter on which, I believe, public opinion has been greatly disturbed. I cannot believe that, on fuller consideration, the Persian Government and Parliament will fail to realise how gravely the credit of the Persian State throughout the world must be affected by high-handed action such as

  613
  this in plain breach of a legal instrument into which they had voluntarily entered. I feel sure that the House will support His Majesty's Government in any steps they may think well to take in order to secure an equitable issue from a situation which is of great immediate and still greater ultimate importance.

  ECCLESIASTICAL DILAPIDATIONS MEASURES, 1923 to 1929 (AMENDMENT) MEASURE, 1951
  4.19 p.m.
  THE LORD BISHOP OF LONDON THE LORD BISHOP OF LONDON rose to move to resolve, That in accordance with the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act, 1919, this House do direct that the Ecclesiastical Dilapidations Measures, 1923 to 1929 (Amendment) Measure, 1951, be presented to His Majesty for the Royal Assent. The right reverend Prelate said: My Lords, I have the honour to introduce three small Ecclesiastical Measures. They have all been predigested by the Ecclesiastical Committee, and that Committee affirms that the Measures are not in any degree contentious and do not conflict with any of the constitutional rights of His Majesty's subjects. The first is an Ecclesiastical Dilapidations Measure. It will be known to noble Lords that the custom in the past has been to assess dilapidations of a parson's house once every five years. During the war, arrangements were made by which that assessment took place once every seven years. It was found so agreeable a solution of difficulties at that time that it is now desired to extend it. Unfortunately, the Measure that would allow it ran out on January 1 of this year, and therefore a new Measure is necessary in order to make it possible again. I beg to move.
  Moved to resolve, That in accordance with the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act, 1919, this House do direct that the Ecclesiastical Dilapidations Measures, 1923 to 1929 (Amendment) Measure, 1951, be presented to His Majesty for the Royal Assent.—(The Lord Bishop of London.)
  On Question, Motion agreed to, and ordered accordingly.

  CATHEDRALS (APPOINTED COMMISSIONS) MEASURE, 1951
  4.20 p.m.
  THE LORD BISHOP OF LONDON THE LORD BISHOP OF LONDON rose to move to resolve, That in accordance with the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act, 1919, this House do direct that the Cathedrals (Appointed Commissions) Measure, 1951, be presented to His Majesty for the Royal Assent.
  The right reverend Prelate said: My Lords, this Measure is to enable a payment to be made to special commissions which may be appointed to investigate Cathedral Statutes. Under the old Measure a comprehensive commission was appointed to investigate Cathedral Statutes all through the country, and arrangements were made for the Church Commissioners to pay for that work to be done. It was provided also that if any further inquiry was made in any particular case an ad hoc commission should be set to do that work. Unfortunately, however, arrangement was not made for the payment of the ad hoc commission. That is the relief which is desired in this Measure. It is sought to give the Church Commissioners power to pay for the special commission. I beg to move.
  Moved to resolve, That in accordance with the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act, 1919, this House do direct that the Cathedrals (Appointed Commissions) Measure, 1951, be presented to His Majesty for the Royal Assent.—(The Lord Bishop of London.)
  On Question, Motion agreed to, and ordered accordingly.

  BENEFICES (STABILISATION OF INCOMES) MEASURE. 1951
  THE LORD BISHOP OF LONDON THE LORD BISHOP OF LONDON rose to move to resolve, That in accordance with the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act, 1919, this House do direct that the Benefices (Stabilisation of Incomes) Measure, 1951, be presented to His Majesty for the Royal Assent. The right reverend Prelate said: My Lords, this third Measure deals with the method by which clergy receive their stipends. For the most part stipends are paid out of the General Fund of the Church Commissioners, and to that extent they are stable. Unfortunately, however, there are a large number of special funds attached

  615
  to benefices, and clergy who are paid from these funds do not receive a fixed and stable amount. As the investments fluctuate and vary, so inevitably the parsons' stipends fluctuate and vary. It is desired to make these men a steady payment. This Measure seeks to take these special funds and merge them into the Church Commissioners' General Fund, so that the clergy may receive their customary emoluments from that Fund. That will enable the whole of the parsons' stipends to be stabilised. I beg to move.
  Moved to resolve, That in accordance with the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act, 1919, this House do direct that the Benefices (Stabilization of In-comes) Measure, 1951, be presented to His Majesty for the Royal Assent.—(The Lord Bishop of London.)
  On Question, Motion agreed to, and ordered accordingly.

  SALMON AND FRESHWATER FISHERIES (PROTECTION) (SCOTLAND) BILL
  4.23 p.m.
  Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.
  THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF WORKS (LORD MORRISON): My Lords, the House will remember that during the Second Reading of the Bill great interest was taken in this measure and noble Lords who took part in the debate expressed the view that in the interests of salmon fisheries it should be passed into law at the earliest possible date. The noble Earl, Lord Selkirk, who I am sorry to say is not here this afternoon, raised on Second Reading a point in relation to the apprehension of offenders by private citizens, and I undertook to give a reply at this stage. I am informed that: Scottish law recognises the right and duty of any citizen witnessing a common law offence to apprehend a criminal, but in relation to a statutory offence there is no power in the citizen to apprehend an offender unless that power is conferred by the Statute which sets up the offence. This view was expressed in Macdonald's Criminal Law of Scotland, Fifth edition. I may say that the Lord Advocate in replying to an
  616
  Amendment moved by Lord Dunglass during the Committee stage of the Bill in another place, dealt more fully with this subject. It is a long time since a measure dealing with the Scottish salmon fisheries was added to the Statute Book. This Bill seeks to bring the law into line with modern conditions, and also to give the freshwater fisheries a better and more logical system of protection than they have hitherto enjoyed. In particular, it is designed to protect stocks of fish against the destructive methods of poaching which have been developed in recent years and to give salmon a somewhat longer period at the week-ends to make their way up river to spawn. The Government appreciate the friendly and encouraging reception which has been given to the proposals contained in the Bill. I beg to move that the Bill be read a third time.
  Moved, that the Bill be now read 3a.— (Lord Morrison.)
  LORD BALFOUR OF INCHRYE: My Lords, my noble friend Lord Selkirk asked me to convey his apologies to the noble Lord, Lord Morrison, and to your Lord-ships that he is unable to be here to-day. He will no doubt read the observations made by the noble Lord. I will only repeat what I said on Second Reading: I think this is a good Bill; it does not give all we want, but it goes a long way. The sooner it is on the Statute Book, the better we on this side of the House shall be pleased.
  On Question, Bill read 3a, and passed.

  SEA FISH INDUSTRY BILL
  An Amendment reported (according to Order).

  BRITISH TRANSPORT COMMISSION BILL GREAT YARMOUTH PORT AND HAVEN BILL TRENT RIVER BOARD BILL
  Brought from the Commons; read la, and referred to the Examiners.
  House adjourned at twenty-six minutes past four o'clock.