HL Deb 25 June 1953 vol 182 cc1275-84

4.28 p.m.

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

THE POSTMASTER GENERAL (EARL DE LA WARR)

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do resolve itself into Committee on this Bill.

Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Earl De La Warr.)

LORD PAKENHAM

My Lords, before we go into Committee on this Bill, I should perhaps say one word about certain matters that were raised on the Second Reading. They were raised, in the first instance, by the noble and learned Earl, Lord Jowitt, and by the noble Earl, Lord Iddesleigh. They are matters of special moment to Catholics, but not to Catholics only. Since that time, conversations have taken place with the Minister of Education and her colleagues, and I would only say at this stage that I do not propose to return to those matters this afternoon, as I understand that there will be an opportunity for full discussions at a later stage.

On Question, Motion agreed to.

House in Committee accordingly:

[The LORD MERTHYR in the Chair]

Clauses 1 to 5 agreed to.

LORD BURDEN moved, after Clause 5, to insert the following new clause:

Interim Arrangements for school dental treatment.

".—(1) Until comprehensive facilities for free dental treatment can be provided in accordance with section four of this Act nothing in that section shall prevent a local education authority from making arrangements for pupils to receive such treatment under Part IV of the National Health Service Act, 1946.

(2) In the application of this section to Scotland it shall be read and have effect as if:—

  1. (a) a reference to section five of this Act were substituted for the reference to section four of this Act;
  2. (b) the expression "education authority" were substituted for the expression "local education authority"; and
  3. (c) a reference to the National Health Service (Scotland) Act, 1947, were substituted for the reference to the National Health Service Act, 1946."

The noble Lord said: I am sorry to be a nuisance in moving a further Amendment, but I put this down in the hope of getting some statement from Her Majesty's Government. I agree that it was put on the Marshalled List only this morning, and perhaps the noble Earl in charge of the Bill would like me to indicate in a few words what it is about. Then, if he wishes to have time in which to look at it I shall be quite prepared to leave it. Alternatively, perhaps he could indicate whether he is going to turn it down now; then we should know where we are.

EARL DE LA WARR

I am going to turn it down.

LORD BURDEN

Then we know where we are. It has been represented to me by a number of people who are active so far as dentists and the organisation of dentists is concerned that this is a serious matter, and that while the education authorities are building up their dental service we ought not to be content just to sit back and wait until that is done, but that we should endeavour to provide for full dental treatment for the time being in some other way. I understand that the teeth of children should be examined either two or three times a year. I am sure that Her Majesty's Government would like to see every local authority have its own full dental service through its own officers. I take it that that would be the ideal which we should all like to see. I do not know whether it is the case that dentists are subject to the ordinary incentives which noble Lords on the Government Benches make so much about, and have gone out from the school dental service into other employment because of the higher remuneration outside, thereby causing the dental service to be depleted; but while the local education authorities are obviously very short of staff the second best thing would be for a list to be drawn up of dentists within the area who would be prepared to help carry out the local school service. That is the intention of this Amendment. I hope the noble Earl will agree that it is a good intention. If I am wrong and it is not well intentioned, then I shall be happy to listen to what he has to say. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— After Clause 5, insert the said new clause.—(Lord Burden.)

EARL DE LA WARR

I thank the noble Lord for the way in which he has moved this Amendment. He is quite right in thinking that there is no real disagreement between us as to our objective. We want to see the best possible school dental service for these children. What the noble Lord is worried about is the interim period when we are building up the school dental service. Perhaps he rather exaggerates the danger that the problem will not be tackled during that interim period, because, after all, as matters stand children are free to make use of the National Health Service. The noble Lord wants to give power to local education authorities to come into this problem and use the Health Service. The Government definitely do not want to do that, because they feel that a number of local education authorities may not be keen on building up a full and complete service and may therefore be tempted not to go ahead with schemes that we all feel to be most important.

The noble Lord would have a much stronger case if at the moment, we were disappointed with the progress that is being made with the building up of the school service. After all, a short time ago there were only 700 dentists in the school service; that number has now increased to over 900 and is close to the peak figure reached in 1948. I am not going to say that it is anywhere near large enough; it is only that the graph is all the time going in the right direction. I would therefore ask the noble Lord not to press this Amendment, because I really could not accept it.

LORD WEBB-JOHNSON

It may be unusual to intervene after the reply of the Government spokesman, but I endorse what the noble Earl has said and hope that the noble Lord who moved the Amendment will withdraw it. There are dangers in his proposal. It may well be that by encouraging local education authorities to organise the direction of children to private surgeries, the development of a school dental service may be delayed. I earnestly hope—although I find myself in rather an embarrassing position—that my colleagues in the dental profession will direct their energies to urging the Government to press forward with the Dentists Bill so that the dental profession will have control of the situation, not by any direction of Parliament but by powers and responsibilities being put upon their shoulders. It will then be up to the General Dental Council, as a responsible body, to organise an efficient school dental service.

LORD BURDEN

I am grateful to the noble Earl. I quite agree that the Amendment is concerned with the interim period. I do not know whether it was a tug at the memory which enabled the noble Earl to put before us the argument that palliatives really postpone remedies. I think that that is really his point. On the understanding that everything will be done to encourage the building up of the service—one is gratified to know of the increase in numbers of dentists, but of course it by no means fills the gap at the present time—I do not propose to press the Amendment. I beg leave to withdraw it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clauses 6 to 11 agreed to.

4.40 p.m.

EARL DE LA WARR moved, after Clause 11 to insert the following new clause:

Provisions with respect to transport of certain pupils

".—(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a local education authority shall have power, for the purpose of facilitating the attendance at any school or county college or at any course or class provided in pursuance of a scheme of further education in force for their area of pupils for whose transport free of charge no arrangements are made by the authority under subsection (1) of section fifty-five of the principal Act, to permit such pupils, in consideration of t he payment to the authority of fares of sash amounts as appear to them to be reasonable, to be carried in a motor vehicle used for providing transport in pursuance of arrangements made under that subsection:

Provided that the powers conferred by this subsection on a local education authority shall not be exercisable by them in respect of any part of the route on which a vehicle runs in pursuance of any such arrangements, being a part outside the special area, except with the written consent of the licensing authority for public service vehicles in whose area that part of the route is situate, and shall not be exercisable by them in respect of any part of such a route, being a part within the special area, except with the written consent both of the licensing authority for public service vehicles for that area and of the British Transport Commission.

(2) A motor vehicle used for providing transport in pursuance of arrangements made under the said subsection (1) shall not, for the purposes of Part IV of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, be deemed, in the case of a vehicle belonging to a local education authority, to be a public service vehicle, or, in any other case, to be a stage carriage or express carriage, by reason only of the carriage therein of a person who is charged a fare by virtue of the foregoing subsection.

(3) In this section the expression 'special area' has the meaning assigned to it by subsection (1) of section one hundred and seven of the London Passenger Transport Act, 1933."

The noble Earl said: As I said on the Second Reading of the Bill, this Amendment deals with a matter which was raised in another place. It is rather a technical subject, and it is for that reason that it has taken a little time to prepare the Amendment, and why we had to put it down in this way instead of inserting it in the Bill. Briefly, its purpose is to empower local education authorities to fill vacant seats in an omnibus that is provided for the free transport of pupils by taking up other pupils and charging them a reasonable fare. The new clause is necessary because, under the existing law, if a local education authority wished to charge fares in a hired school omnibus they would first have to secure a road service licence from the licensing authority for public service vehicles. If the local education authority owned and operated the omnibus they would have to get certain other licences as well. Under Part IV of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, they would have to follow an elaborate and lengthy procedure which might involve a public hearing and an appeal to the Minister of Transport.

We have come to the conclusion that to exempt altogether from the licensing system local education authorities who wish to use the powers that are put forward in this clause would create an undesirable precedent. But we have thought that it was reasonable in these cases to simplify procedure considerably, and to require of the local education authority only that it shall get the written consent of the proper licensing authority. There should not be any difficulty about this where school omnibuses are running over a route that is not served by any other omnibus. When this Bill is passed, my right honourable friend intends to issue a circular to local education authorities about the form which the application should take and the considerations which the licensing authorities may be expected to take into account. This circular will be agreed with the Ministry of Transport, and copies will be sent to all the licensing authorities.

There are two final points. The term "special area" refers broadly to the area in which the London Transport Executive have special rights. Within that area, it will be necessary for the consent of the British Transport Commission as well as that of the appropriate licensing authority to be obtained. Secondly—and I think this is a matter which is of some interest to the noble Lord, Lord Pakenham—I ought to make it clear that this new clause neither removes nor adds to the powers and duties in regard to the provision of free transport which authorities already have under Section 55 (1) of the 1944 Act. It simply gives authorities a new power in relation to pupils not covered by their arrangements under that subsection, which they can use or not at their discretion. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— After Clause 11, insert the said new clause.—(Earl De La Warr.)

THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES

To the Amendment which the noble Earl, Lord De La Warr, has moved there is, as your Lordships are aware, an Amendment to be moved by the noble Lord, Lord Jessel. I understand that the noble Lord wishes to move his Amendment to the Amendment in a slightly different form from that printed. He wishes to leave out the word "that" after the letter (b)—this is a purely drafting alteration. The noble Lord also wishes, with the permission of the Committee, to insert in the fifth line of the paragraph, after the word "other" the words "equally suitable." I understand that, with the permission of the Committee, the noble Lord wishes to move his Amendment in that form.

LORD JESSEL moved, as an Amendment to the proposed new clause, at the end of the proviso to subsection (1) to insert: ;and (b) the licensing authority for public service vehicles for any area shall not give their consent to an exercise by a local education authority of the powers conferred on them by this section unless they are satisfied that there are no other equally suitable transport facilities which meet the reasonable needs of the pupils proposed to be carried in exercise of those powers. The noble Lord said: As your Lordships have heard from the Lord Chairman, I wish to make two small alterations in the Amendment to the Amendment standing in my name on the Marshalled List. The noble Earl, Lord De La Warr, has explained the purpose of the new clause, and I must just say a few words on that subject. As he has said, this new clause deals with the transport of pupils to school. It gives power to local education authorities, in certain circumstances, to charge fares to school children. It makes transport available for children for whom local authorities are not required to provide free transport, and allows the authorities to charge such children a fare. I understand that it is not intended that special vehicles should be provided for this purpose, but that where a vehicle already conveys children free of charge and where there are seats available it will be possible for the vehicle to take up fare-paying pupils.

Your Lordships will have noticed that under the new clause, a local education authority is not to exercise this power except with the written consent of the licensing authority for public service vehicles in whose area that part of the route is situate. The object of my Amendment to the Amendment is to clarify the factors which the licensing authority must take into consideration when deciding whether or not to give this consent. I hope that the result of this Amendment will be constantly to remind the licensing authority that, where public transport facilities are already available for pupils in respect of whom free transport is not provided, it will not be considered necessary to give permission for what I call the "free vehicles" to carry fare-paying passengers as well. This new clause already breaks fresh ground in making it possible, in certain circumstances, for the vehicles of the local education authority to carry fare-paying passengers without a licence. Therefore, we must be most careful to see that the interests of the operators of public transport are safeguarded. That is what this Amendment seeks to do. I beg to move.

Amendment to the Amendment moved— At the end of the proviso to subsection (1) of the proposed new clause, insert the said words.—(Lord Jessel.)

4.48 p.m.

LORD PAKENHAM

I should like respectfully to offer a mild word of protest on a point of procedure. I think the noble Lord, Lord Jessel, will agree that his Amendment appeared only this morning. I am not quite sure when the noble Earl's Amendment appeared; I think it was yesterday. These are very complex matters. I do not feel that any damage has been caused to anyone as a result of this delay, but I think the noble Marquess the Leader of the House and the noble Earl will agree that in complex matters of this kind it would be very much better if we could have a little more time to consider the Amendments in advance. Frankly, I doubt whether any of us who have not been behind the scenes in the last few days in regard to this Amendment have had a proper opportunity of giving to it the attention which members of the Committee would wish to give to it. I have said that these matters are complex, and I think the noble Earl will agree, because, although the actual proposals are small, the matter is one that it is hard to follow up, if only because, in practice, so much is left to the local education authorities; and they may read all sorts of things into these proposals which may not be intended to be there. I do not regard this question of transport for children as being at all in a satisfactory position at the present time in this country. However, I do not propose to pursue that aspect of the matter this afternoon.

The noble Earl was courteous enough to try to satisfy me, and those who might think as I do, about the implications of this new clause, which he has explained to us so carefully. As I understood him, this clause will not relieve local education authorities of any duties in regard to the provision of transport. I should like to ask the noble Earl whether I am right in thinking that this clause does not relieve the local education authorities of any duty to provide transport.

EARL DE LA WARR

No, it does not.

LORD PAKENHAM

I am grateful to the noble Earl. If this clause does not relieve local education authorities of any duties that now fall upon them and is only supplemental to existing provisions, I welcome it. On that understanding I have no objection to it. The noble Lord, Lord Jessel, indicated, more in the preliminary notice to his speech than in his remarks concerning this Amendment, that he was going to clarify his Amendment to the Amendment by introducing the words "equally suitable." Before I say any more, because these words would satisfy me, I should like to know whether the noble Earl is going to accept these words on behalf of the Government.

EARL DE LA WARR

If I may say a word in defence of the noble Lord, Lord Jessel, and, of course, of the noble Lord, Lord Burden, with regard to his last Amendment, we are entitled in Committee to hand in Amendments at the last moment, including manuscript Amendments. I do not include myself in this defence because I collected the Paper containing my Amendment from the Printed Paper Office on Monday. I also warned your Lordships in my Second Reading speech of the possibility of this Amendment.

LORD PAKENHAM

I should like to apologise to the noble Earl for misrepresenting him. I was under the impression that his Amendment was not available until Wednesday.

EARL DE LA WARR

Thank you. With regard to Lord Jessel's Amendment to the Amendment, I am in an awkward position. I was going to accept it, but the noble Lord has rather spoilt the wicket by seeking to alter the wording. As I decided to accept the Amendment to the Amendment after careful discussion with a number of parties, and as I am advised, mainly on the ground of drafting, that the words "the reasonable needs of the pupils" meet the noble Lord's point, I hope the noble Lord will not ask me at this last moment to accept the change he proposes. If he will move the Amendment to the Amendment in its original form, I will gladly accept it.

LORD JESSEL

I am grateful for the noble Earl's remarks. If he is prepared to accept my Amendment to the Amendment as printed on the Marshalled List, but omitting the word "that," then I shall be satisfied. I made what I considered an unnecessary but harmless alteration at the request of other noble Lords who thought it would be of assistance, but I am in the hands of the Committee in this matter. If it is permissible for me now to move the Amendment to the Amendment as it appears on the Marshalled List, but omitting the word "that," I should like to do so.

LORD PAKENHAM

In view of the fact that we did not see the Amendment to the Amendment until this morning, I feel that we are entitled to ask that there should be an opportunity of discussing it, if necessary, on Report stage. If that is possible, I should be ready, so to speak, to let it go now.

EARL DE LA WARR

Of course, there is a Report stage. The clause has been amended and therefore can be discussed on Report.

LORD JESSEL

I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment to the Amendment in the form in which I moved it, and to move it as it appears on the Marshalled List, but omitting the word "that" after (b).

Amendment to the Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment to the Amendment moved—

At the end of the proviso to subsection (1) of the proposed new clause insert— ("; and (b) the licensing authority for public service vehicles for any area shall not give their consent to an exercise by a local education authority of the powers conferred on them by this section unless they are satisfied that there are no other transport facilities which meet the reasonable needs of the pupils proposed to be carried in exercise of those powers.")—(Lord Jessel.)

On Question. Amendment to the Amendment agreed to.

Amendment, as amended, agreed to.

Remaining clauses and Schedules agreed to.

House resumed.