HL Deb 06 June 1957 vol 204 cc247-66

3.47 p.m.

Order of the Day for the Third Reading read.

THE MINISTER OF POWER (LORD MILLS)

My Lords, I suggest, if your Lordships agree, that we should follow the normal procedure of giving this Bill a formal Third Reading, after which we can take the Amendments shown on the Marshalled List. We can then make any such concluding speeches that may be desired. If this is agreed, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a third time.

Moved, That the Bill be now read 3a.—(Lord Mills.)

On Question. Bill read 3a, with the Amendments.

Clause 4 [Whole-time members of Generating Boad, Electricity Council and Area Boards]:

LORD MILLS moved, at the beginning of the clause to insert: 4.—(1) The office of chairman of the Generating Board or of the Electricity Council shall not be held except by a person appointed as a whole-time member of the Board or Council. (2) Subject to the preceding subsection,".

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment requires that the offices of the chairmen of the Electricity Council and of the Generating Board shall be whole-time appointments. This is in accordance with the undertaking that I gave to the noble Lord, Lord Lucas of Chilworth, on the Report stage. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 5, line 12, at beginning insert the said new subsection and words.—(Lord Mills.)

LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTH

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for his concession of my point.

On Question, Amendment agreed to. Clause 34:

Special provisions as to public inquiries

34.—(1) Where an application has been made to the Minister for his consent or authorisation under paragraph (b) of section ten of the Schedule of 1899, or for his consent under section two of the Electric Lighting Act, 1909, and the local planning authority have notified the Minister that they object to the application, and that objection of the local planning authority has not been withdrawn, the Minister (either in addition to, or in lieu of, any other hearing or opportunity of stating objections) shall cause a public inquiry to be held, and, before determining whether to give his consent or authorisation, shall consider the objection and the report of the person who held the inquiry:

Provided that this subsection shall not apply where the Minister proposes to accede to the application subject to such modifications or conditions as will give effect to the objection of the local planning authority.

LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTH moved, in subsection (1), to leave out all words from and including "have notified" down to and including "withdrawn," and to insert instead: after giving public notice, considering any objection that may be made and consulting with the local authorities, the Council for the Preservation of Rural England and other appropriate national and local bodies, have notified the Minister that there are objections by the planning authority or by persons aggrieved by the application or by the local authorities or bodies consulted and that those objections have not been withdrawn,

The noble Lord said: My Lords, this Amendment appears upon the Order Paper in consequence of the discussion we had upon the Report stage upon one of the three Amendments moved by the noble Lord, Lord Mills, affecting the amenity provisions. I suggested to your Lordships that, while the noble Lord went a very long way to meet us, for which I am sure we were all most indebted to him, he had gone a little too far in trying to safeguard himself against the nuisance individual, and had non-suited the private objector entirely. I suggested for his consideration that the words which appear on the Marshalled List this afternoon should be inserted in subsection (1) of his new clause, which is now Clause 34 of the Bill. In reply to me the noble Lord promised to consider the matter. As his consideration has been abortive, at least from the point of view of results—nothing has appeared upon the Order Paper—I thought I had better put down my Amendment again.

I am not going to go over all the points. Briefly, my main point is this. If your Lordships will look at Clause 34 (1) you will see that the planning authority is the only authority mentioned in this clause whose objection can cause the Minister to hold a public inquiry regarding the siting of either a power station or an overhead line. If the planning authority withdraws its objection it does not matter who else has objected, they are all non-suited. That is how I read the clause. There may be some confusion in my mind, as. I know there has been confusion in the departmental mind. The Statutes governing electricity supply are very involved and have not been consolidated since 1899, so that even the Department did not understand some of them.

There is, however, a statutory requirement for the Minister not only to consult the planning authority but for the planning authority and the Minister—one or the other, or both together—to consult the local authority within the area of the planning committee. The noble Lord the Minister made this abundantly clear in answering my noble friend Lord Alexander of Hillsborough on the Committee stage, when my noble friend raised the point about the Bradwell power station. The noble Lord the Minister then said [OFFICIAL REPORT, Vol. 204 (No. 76), col. 161]: It is the intention that all local authorities—not only the planning authority, but the local authorities—shall he consulted on matters relating to the territories which they cover.

May I illustrate the point to your Lordships in this way? If the Berkshire County Council as the planning authority for the County of Berkshire desire to erect a power station on one side of the River Thames, they have to consult all the local authorities within the County of Berkshire. But tie Oxford County Council, twenty yards on the other side of the river, who may have their amenities spoiled for always by either a power station or a row of pylons, do not have to be consulted by anybody. That is my first complaint. I do not consider that that is right. I think that all local authorities who are aggrieved by the granting of planning permission should have the right to appeal to the Minister and to cause the Minister to hold a public inquiry.

My second objection is that this clause as drafted non-suits the private individual. Under existing legislation, under the Town and Country Planning Act, 1947, a private individual who is aggrieved and over whose land a line may go or a pylon may be placed, or a person next door who has no wayleave to grant but whose amenities are disturbed and who is affronted, has ground to ask for—and it is usual for the Minister to grant—a public inquiry. It appears to me that the Minister has now insulated himself against all objection from any private individual. According to my reading of this clause, if a planning authority raises objection to the planning permission, then the Minister shall—"shall" is the word—cause a public inquiry to be held, and then all and sundry can appear. But if the planning authority throw their hand in and do not object to the planning permission, no private individual can get a hearing.

Admittedly, the noble Lord the Minister has to assure himself that the local authorities have been consulted; and if the local authorities under the planning authority say, "We object," the noble Lord, in his judgment, can then hold a public inquiry. But the Council for the Preservation of Rural England, a responsible national body, and, if the project happened to be in Oxford, the Oxford Preservation Trust, a highly respectable local body, and a private landowner or occupier—all are non-suited under this clause. I have therefore put down this Amendment because, as I have said before, I think it is only right that where a statutory body like the Central Electricity Authority in the past, or anyone in the future—whether it be the Generating Board or an Area Board—are given the right of a compulsory way leave across people's private property, or where a way-leave is being granted across one person's private property which affronts the amenity of somebody else, the Minister, if he has the last word, should provide proper safeguards.

I know what the Minister wants to do, and I agree with it. There are cranks, and the Minister does not want hundreds of people from one side of England complaining that they loathe pylons on principle. But because a law is difficult to enforce, that is no reason why the rights of individuals should be overridden quite so much as appears here. I have a letter here, one of fifty which I have received during the passage of this Bill. I will read a small portion of it. Here is a private owner who says: I was deprived of essential evidence at the inquiry which was held at…

I will not mention the name but I will tell the noble Lord, the Minister, afterwards if he wishes: The British Electricity Authority posted the map in question three days after the hearing, in spite of continual requests from my solicitors and my surveyors for the document.

I know very well that the Minister has safeguarded this position in the future, but under this Bill that man will be non-suited. He will not be able to go to an inquiry at all unless the planning authority responsible for that area raise the matter. I do not think it is necessary for me to say any more. I hope your Lordships will agree with me that I am doing nothing here to alter any principle of the Bill. I am doing only what I believe the Minister himself wants to do: to safeguard amenities by giving this right to authoritative bodies, such as local parish councils and local authorities, and bodies like the Council for the Preservation of Rural England. But, above all, I want the private individual to have the right to object and to carry his objection to the Minister; and the Minister should be able to hold a public inquiry. With those words, I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 32, line 14, leave out from ("authority") to ("the") in line 16 and insert (" after giving public notice, considering any objection that may be made and consulting with the local authorities, the Council for the Preservation of Rural England and other appropriate national and local bodies, have notified the Minister that there are objections by the planning authority or by persons aggrieved by the application or by the local authorities or bodies consulted and that those objections have not been withdrawn,").—(Lord Lucas of Chilworth.)

4.0 p.m.

LORD LAWSON

My Lords, before the noble Lord the Minister replies, may say how extremely sorry I was that I was unable, owing to circumstances over which I had no control, to take part in the debates upon this Bill, though I read the reports. I noticed that during the discussions the question of having an independent chairman for these public inquiries was raised, but as there is an investigation now in progress with regard to that matter, it was recognised that no decision could be taken upon it at present. My noble friend has done his best to secure the adoption of a serious method of handling this matter in the meantime, until the investigators report. I think it ought to be clearly recognised by this time that the ordinary method of investigation by the authorities is not good enough. Whatever the form of inquiry may be in the future, whatever bodies may take part in it, the ordinary inquiry, as it is understood at the present time, is not good enough, in view of the situation which has been created by this Electricity Bill and the general subject with which we are dealing, which touches the production of atomic power.

If one thing is certain, it is that, unless steps are taken in this connection, matters will not improve; they will get worse. I want to say one thing about the Electricity Boards, if I may say it speaking upon this Amendment. I am not so sure that these Boards have anything like the powers which they ought to have to meet the situation which they are now called upon to face, having regard to the use of power produced at the new atomic stations. Those who are concerned with the National Parks have had experience of this matter. They know that if they ask that a certain length of cable—say 200 yards of it—shall be placed underground, there is a great "how-do-you-do" as to whether that can be done or not. An Electricity Board certainly have the power to do it, but usually they say that it would be too costly. In the Lake District, there has been a classic instance in which the supply of electric power has been held up for I do not know how long, simply because of the lack of ability to underground a line for some 200 yards.

I must say that I do not understand how such a situation can come about in the 20th century. All around us in the coalfields we have open-cast working going on. For this purpose machines are employed which could underground all these wires that are to be put over-ground. And let me observe that putting them overground is bound to have a profound effect on the scenery of this country. Pylons will be raised and there will, of course, be masses of material employed for different purposes. It seems to me that the electricity authorities in the 20th century ought to have at their disposal the necessary machinery to enable them to underground wire. They could do this work quite easily if they had some of the bulldozers that are used on the open-cast workings. In a manner of speaking, we now go to bed one night with green fields all around us and a few days later we find that we have mountains of earth that have been thrown up as a result of these open-cast operations. In the course of time, the coal is taken out and the people concerned put the land back in as good a state as it was before—so they say. This is done now in the process of getting power from underground, from coal. Why cannot the electricity authorities have at their disposal the same means to deal with the difficult situation now confronting them?

One of the chief authorities concerned with this matter is the Council for the Preservation of Rural England. I am very glad that my noble friend Lord Lucas of Chilworth has included that Council among the bodies which, by the terms of his Amendment, would have to be consulted in this matter. If there is one good thing that the debates on this Bill have done, it is that they have made it clear that there is in this country a great body of people who are apprehensive as to what the result of the application of atomic power is going to be upon some of the wonderful and beautiful places that have been left to us, in spite of the first Industrial Revolution. We are going to have another Industrial Revolution. The Minister probably cannot help it—I do not know—but, if I may say so, I feel that in this matter we are taking a course for which future generations will criticise us strongly, having regard to the experience which we have had and of which we have not made use. For that reason I wish to support the Amendment of my noble friend, designed, as it is, to give the Minister power to consult with various authorities indicated in the manner which Lord Lucas of Chilworth has described in detail. The Minister will have power to consult with the C.P.R.E. and other bodies as well as various authorities.

Let no one be under any illusion as to the strength of feeling which exists in many parts of the country upon this matter. Let us be quite clear what is being done. I have seen one of the great stations in Cumberland, which is very well known, and I have also seen a second one. Do not let anyone be under any illusion that these places are works of art; because they are not. When I saw what I should describe as these great cement monstrosities (I am well aware that they have to be shaped and handled according to the state of development which they are in) I was profoundly affected. Other stations may perhaps be better to look at. I tell your Lordships frankly that when I saw Calder Hall, with its great towers, those monstrous masses of cement, f longed for the sight of a good old-fashioned pitheap, which I think is no less artistic than these new stations. And if I have come here to-day to say anything, it is just to say that. I should like to disillusion the Minister. Whilst I understand the difficulties, in the earlier stages, of constructing these stations to handle this power, I hope that the present stations are not the last word in art; because if they are, the criticism of future generations will not only be hefty but justified. I have great pleasure in supporting my noble friend's Amendment.

LORD MILLS

My Lords, I have listened to the noble Lord, Lord Lawson, with great interest and great respect. I only wish that he had been able to be present during the lengthy debates we have had on this subject at all stages of the Bill I can assure him that I am fully seized with the consequences of trying to provide this country with the power it needs and, at the same time, I am fully seized with the importance of looking after the amenities of the countryside. Listening to the noble Lord, Lord Lucas of Chilworth, one would think that in this Bill I had been trying to restrict the rights of authorities and individuals. Of course the contrary is the case. I have been trying to put into the Bill the fullest measure of practice which should properly en into the Bill and to keep out of the Bill those things which do not weigh. Since our debate last week I have consulted my right honourable friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government.

In the first place, there are one or two matters on which we should be quite clear. The noble Lord, Lord Lucas of Chilworth, has stressed particularly that some local planning authorities do not do their job as well as others, and seems to imply that if the local planning authority choose to ignore the local authority, the local authority would be helpless. That is not so. Under Section 2 of the 1909 Act, in a power station case, and under Section 21 of the 1919 Act, in an overhead lines case, the local authority has a separate right to be notified and to be heard by the Minister.

LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTH

Only if it is in the area.

LORD MILLS

The local authority is notified by the Electricity Board concerned at about the same time as the local planning authority, and before the local planning authority in the case of overhead lines. There is a printed form for overhead lines which the Board sends to the local authority; and we will see that it is sent as widely as it should be sent. The local authority record their views on it and indicate whether they wish the Minister to hear them. The form so completed is forwarded to the local planning authority, who do likewise and then return it to the Board for formal submission to the Minister. Incidentally, the local planning authority also record their views on the Board's formal application for "deemed planning permission" on another form, to which I shall refer later.

Since power station projects are comparatively few in number, the local authority is notified of them not by a printed form, but by a copy of the Central Authority's application to the Minister under Section 2 of the 1909 Act. Whatever the views of the local planning authority on an overhead line or power station project, as I have said, the local authority has a right to be heard by the Minister. If both authorities object, the Minister can either hear them together, under Clause 34, or he can hear the local authority separately. Though Clause 34 does not oblige the Minister to order a public inquiry when a local authority objects, he may always do so under Section 66 of the 1947 Act when he considers it desirable, and would always do so if the local authority's comments indicated a substantial volume of local objection. It is the business of local authorities, I suggest, to be in touch with public opinion in their areas. In a rural district council, for example, there is a councillor for, perhaps, every two parishes. A project from an Electricity Board would no doubt first be inquired into by the council's surveyor, who ought to know the local people and what their attitude is likely to be. When the surveyor's report goes before the council, the councillors representing the parishes affected have an opportunity to comment. The local authority is then in a position, if it does its job, to see that local interests do not go by default. Obviously, therefore, the local authority is not left high and dry merely because the local planning authority decides not to object.

I now come to the local planning authority itself. The procedure which Electricity Boards have to follow in referring projects through the local planning authority for the Minister of Power's "deemed planning permission" has been laid down in published circulars of the Ministry of Town and Country Planning (now the Ministry of Housing and Local Government) since 1948. The current circular is No. 6351, dated December 4. 1951. This circular provides a form in which the Electricity Boards submit their projects to the Minister. Part I of the form is the application for "deemed planning permission" and is filled in by the Board, who have to give particulars of the project and of any objections which have been made to the Board at the formative stage. The Board then send the form to the local planning authority, who have to fill in Part II. In practice, this often means the local authority exercising delegated powers on behalf of the local planning authority. The local planning authority have, among other things, to give the names of interested parties consulted and particulars of any objections received. They have to state whether they themselves object to the project in principle or approve it subject to conditions. Here again, the various national and local bodies concerned with the preservation of amenities should have ample opportunity to express their views before the application reaches the Minister.

I do not feel able to accept the noble Lord's suggestion that there should be included in Clause 34 of the Bill an obligation on the local planning authority to consult any particular national body, because that body might not be interested in all cases. Nor do I like the suggestion that the local planning authority should be obliged to consult—in the noble Lord's words—" other appropriate national and local bodies." Any hastily formed local society might claim that it had been wrongly excluded from consultation, and local planning authorities would not know where they stood. In my view, nothing is to be gained by further elaboration of the procedure in the Bill. But as I have previously informed your Lordships, every part of the procedure is under thorough examination at the present time. This examination will, of course, have regard to the consultation carried out by local planning authorities with other local authorities, including the neighbouring local authorities, to whom the noble Viscount, Lord Alexander of Hillsborough, referred on Report.

I mentioned earlier that the application form requires the Electricity Board concerned to indicate any objections to a project which they have already received before applying. The Ministry of Housing's circular, to which I have referred, stresses the importance of informal consultation with the local planning authority before formal application is made. The noble Lords, Lord Lucas of Chilworth and Lord Chorley, laid considerable emphasis on the need for informing in the embryonic stage of the proceedings those likely to be interested. It is obviously in the interest of the Boards to try to meet objections as early in the proceedings as possible, and whether current practice in this respect can be improved is another matter which I have under examination. But it would be too cumbrous to provide by Statute for this kind of consultation, which would be difficult to define without subjecting the Boards to excessive restriction in the preparation of their schemes.

While on the subject of public inquiries, I should like to make it clear, if it is not already clear from what I said earlier, that public inquiries are not confined to cases within Clause 34 in which the local planning authority objects. It is always open to any authority, body or person to ask the Minister for a public inquiry, and it is open to the Minister, under Section 66 of the 1947 Act, to order such an inquiry. In the light of what I have stated, I hope that the noble Lord will agree that there is no risk of our leaving local authorities high and dry. As regards other consultations, it is difficult to make statutory provision without saying too much or too little; but, as I have indicated, these matters will be examined carefully to see whether any improvements can be made in current practice. I trust that with this explanation I have given the noble Lord sufficient satisfaction

to enable him to withdraw his Amendment.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, although I acknowledge that the noble Lord has taken a great deal of trouble in making h s reply—and we thank him for that—what he has put before us does not meet us at all; and I am afraid we cannot withdraw the Amendment. I am not going to make a speech on the Amendment. I thought my noble friend put all the converging points so clearly before the House that I need not repeat them. What we object to is that this clause which we seek to amend, in fact lays down that only the planning authority, as such, will be the deciding factor with the Minister as to whether there is to be a public inquiry.

I appreciate the spirit in which the Minister has handled this Bill, and I would say this. In the past, the county council, as the planning authority, have frequently been conscious of what is going on, but the small local authorities have not; and individuals behind those local authorities have been quite ignorant of what was going on—ignorant of their rights, and ignorant of possible injuries that might be done to them. We want this matter looked at from the point of view of seeing that the machinery for advertising the plans of the Authority is improved, so that complaints can be submitted by individuals concerned before, and not after, a decision is taken. I want the Statute to be quite clear about what the proper procedure is; and the right of objection ought not to be confined to the planning authority of a county or a county borough. There ought to be a proper means for the individual citizen to express himself right up through all the authorities. Therefore, I shall ask your Lordships to divide on this Amendment.

On Question, Whether the said Amendment shall be agreed to?

Their Lordships divided: Contents, 33; Not-Contents, 31.

CONTENTS
Albemarle, B. Alexander of Hillsborough, V. Boyd-Orr, L.
Bathurst, E. Goschen, V. Braye, L.
Ferrers, E. Massereene and Ferrard, V. Cawley, L.
Listowel, E. Stansgate, V. Chorley, L.
Lucan, E. [Teller.] Stonehaven, V. Denham, L.
Dynevor, L. Hayter, L. Rea, L.
Ebbisham, L. Kinnaird, L. St. Just, L.
Glyn, L. Lawson, L. Sandford, L.
Grantchester, L. Lucas of Chilworth, L. Shepherd, L.
Haden-Guest, L. Mathers, L. [Teller.] Sinha, L.
Harvey of Tasburgh, L. Rathcavan, L. Waleran, L.
NOT-CONTENTS
Kilmuir, V. (L. Chancellor.) Onslow, E. [Teller.] Blackford, L.
Woolton, E. Chesham, L.
Home, E. (L. President.) Ennisdale, L.
Bridgeman, V. Fairfax of Cameron, L.
Lansdowne, M. Davidson, V. Gifford, L.
Reading, M. Furness, V. Hampton, L.
Hailsham, V. Jessel, L.
Beatty, E. Soulbury, V. Mancroft, L.
Dundee, E. Mills, L.
Fortescue, E. [Teller.] Addington, L. Milverton, L.
Gosford, E. Balfour of Burleigh, L. Templemore, L.
Grey, E. Bennett of Edgbaston, L. Teviot, L.

On Question, Amendment agreed to.

Resolved in the affirmative, and Amendment agreed to accordingly.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

My Lords, as this is the first time the Government have been defeated in either House of Parliament since the last mandate, it might be as well if we ask the representative of the Government what they propose to do about it. Well, it does not seem that I am to receive an answer. I suppose the Leader of the House does not yet know about the defeat.

VISCOUNT HAILSHAM

My Lords, in the circumstances I think my noble friend's advice is right.

VISCOUNT ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGH

What is that?—to say nothing?

Clause 37 [Preservation of amenity]:

LORD MILLS

My Lords, with your Lordships' permission, I would refer to Amendments Nos. 3 and 4 together. These Amendments have been put down in pursuance of an undertaking which I gave to my noble friend Lord Hurcomb, who, unfortunately, is not able to be in his place to-day but who tells me that they are entirely acceptable to him. I beg to move.

Amendment moved— Page 36, line 1, after ("beauty") insert ("of conserving flora, fauna and geological or physiographical features of special interest,").—(Lord Mills.)

Amendment moved— Page 36, line 5, after ("such") insert (" flora, fauna, features,").—(Lord Mills.)

4.39 p.m.

LORD MILLS

My Lords, in rising to move that this Bill do now pass, I should like first, with your Lordships' permission, to deal with one or two questions raised on the Report stage by the noble Lord, Lord Lucas of Chilworth. As regards public inquiries, the noble Lord asked for additional provisions for notifying local bodies besides the publication of notices in the newspapers. What additional publicity is required will vary with the circumstances in each case and can be ordered by the Minister under Clause 34 (4). This should, I think, be sufficient.

I have consulted my right honourable friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government about the noble Lord's further suggestion, that the Bill should provide for an inspector of the Ministry of Housing and Local Government to accompany the inspector from my Ministry who is conducting a public inquiry. We do not think that a statutory requirement of this kind would be suitable, because it might not in all cases be necessary. But, as I indicated last week, an inspector from the Ministry of Housing and Local Government would in practice accompany an inspector of my Ministry in most cases. The last point arising out of last week's debate is the noble Lord's suggestion that something should be done to make better known to the public who the local representatives on the Consultative Council are. This is a matter which I will bring to the notice of the Consultative Councils. I may mention that the new subsection (11 A) of Section 7 of the 1947 Act (which is inserted by the First Schedule of the Bill on page 41) has been introduced to enable the Councils to incur expenditure on contingencies, including publicity.

Perhaps I may now be permitted to make a few general remarks about the Bill. Its main object, as your Lordships are aware, is to transfer the Central Authority's responsibility for generation and main transmission to a new statutory corporation, the Generating Board. This Board will be freed from the duty at present imposed upon the Central Authority by Section 1 of the 1947 Act to co-ordinate the distribution of electricity by the Area Boards and to exercise a general control over their policy. The Generating Board will thus be able to devote itself, without other distractions, to the expansion of the country's generating capacity under the programme which I announced to your Lordships early in March. The Bill also aims to promote the enterprise and efficiency of the Generating and Area Boards by making them individually responsible for paying their way, taking one year with another. The central body of the industry will be the Electricity Council, mainly advisory in character but responsible for a number of common services including capital financing and research. It will also be the task of the Council to subject the Boards' capital programme to the critical scrutiny which the Herbert Committee found to be somewhat lacking.

The interest taken in this measure by noble Lords on all sides of the House has produced at each stage of the Bill debates which have been, if I may say so, both stimulating and fruitful. I should like here to acknowledge my indebtedness to my noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor for his invaluable support during the Second Reading debate and to my noble friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Defence for all the help he has given me in Committee and on Report. Without them, my task would have been arduous indeed. May I also express to my noble friend Lord Lucas of Chilworth my admiration for the intense study which he has given to the Bill and for the tireless efforts he has made by way of constructive criticism to improve it. He has also provided me with exercise on three or four occasions during the debate. I hope he will not think that his efforts have been in vain.

For the Government's part, we have done what we could to meet such constructive criticism, and the result has been to enlarge the scope of the Bill in two important ways. In the first place, we lave placed a new statutory obligation upon the Boards, the Electricity Council and the Minister to take into account any effect which plans prepared by the Boards might have on amenity. Secondly, we have introduced certain changes in the procedure by which plans for new power stations and overhead lines receive statutory consent. These changes are designed to ensure that individual and special interests receive all the attention they deserve. These important principles are now being given statutory expression. I am glad that we have been able to go a large part of the way to meet the noble Lord in these matters. There is another direction also in which I am glad to say we have been able to meet the noble Lord's suggestions. I refer, of course, to the clause which lays down the principle of a proper balance between whole-time and part-time members of the Electricity Council and the Boards and under which the Chairmen of the Electricity Council and the Generating Board will be whole-time appointments. By another Amendment we have introduced the same field of selection for the Minister's discretionary appointments to the Electricity Council as for appointments to the Generating Board.

Naturalists and geologists will, I am sure, be pleased that at the instance of the noble Lord, Lord Hurcomb, we have been able to find a place in the Bill for the conservation of creatures, Plants and minerals of special interest. The authority with which the noble Lord speaks on these matters is well known, and those who heard his broadcast in the Third Programme on Saturday night will have been particularly impressed with the growing urgency of this problem throughout the world as new engineering projects are completed. I am grateful to the noble Lord for the reference which he made in his broadcast to the inclusion of this principle in the Bill.

At the suggestion of the noble Lord, Lord Burden, we have made it clear in the Bill that before fixing a retail tariff an Area Board must consult the Consultative Council as well as the Electricity Council. This Amendment is in tune with our general policy of strengthening the position of Consultative Councils, and they will, I am sure, welcome it. I do not wish to detain your Lordships any longer. I hope I have said enough to recall the very careful consideration which this Bill has received in your Lordships' House and the more important Amendments which have been made to it. I beg to move, therefore, that the Bill do now pass.

Moved, That the Bill do now pass.—(Lord Mills.)

4.48 p.m.

LORD LUCAS OF CHILWORTH

My Lords, there is one thing we can all be agreed upon, and that is that this is a much better Bill as it passes from your Lordships' House than it was when it came here. I wish that I could feel that it will work as the Government hope it will work: I have my doubts. Time and history are the only things that will prove whether I am right or wrong. I do not know—I still have my doubts—about the desires of the Government in respect of the autonomy of the Area Boards. As I said on the Report stage, or on the Committee stage, two men can use that word as meaning two entirely different things. I hope there will not be overlapping and that there will not be financial competition in a nationalised industry.

I am not at all happy about the price structure. The noble Lord, I feel sure, will do what he can to implement the undertaking, as undertaking it really was, that the price structure within an area will be spread evenly over all consumers. One has only to see in the Press to-day the announcement of another rise in electricity prices to understand that the main object of the noble Lord's exercise on this Bill is to bring down the cost of this commodity. I hope that in the future we shall have abundant and cheap electrical energy at the hand of every citizen of this country. I myself and my noble friends behind me, particularly my noble friend Lord Wise, have voiced our opinion about the inordinate installation charges that are made. I hope the noble Lord will look into those. I hope the noble Lord will look into quite a number of things, and that he will bring to bear upon them his vast experience of industry which has taught him that mass production at a cheap rate and cheap prices is the only possible economic means of bringing the benefits of civilisation to the masses of human beings.

Perhaps the noble Lord's greatest triumph, as this Bill went through your Lordships' House, was in the direction of something that is not mentioned in the Bill at all—that is, his fight to ensure that industrial and commercial standards are the overriding consideration in the appointment of those who have to run this great industry. In my view, therein lies the secret of success. The noble Lord can spend £3,250 million of the taxpayers' money, the bulk of which will be wasted unless he can employ the best brains in this country to direct an industry of that size. I know that I express only a personal opinion, but in my view the most heartening thing about this Bill is that the present Minister is occupying his office. After all, Bills are Bills, and they make very cold print. If the noble Lord can bring into this great economic problem of the country such dynamic personality as he has done in the field of industry, the country will have reason to be greatly indebted to him. I am grateful to the noble Lord for what he has done with the suggestions I made. The one joy I had in providing what opposition I could to Her Majesty's Government was that it was devoid of Party politics. I think that always shows your Lordships' House at its best, because "none was for the Party and all were for the State".

When we come to the amenity question, I am sure that every citizen of this country who has a love of this "green and pleasant land" will be indebted to the noble Lord for the clauses he has introduced into this Bill and the efforts he has made, a; this late stage of its passage through Parliament, to safeguard, so far as he can, the amenities of our land. I doubt if any Minister has ever done quite so much, and I know that I voice the opinion of everybody in this country who has a love of the English countryside, in expressing our gratitude to him. I await with interest the report of the Oliver Franks Committee. I should think that when that Report is available the debate it may produce in your Lordships' House will be interesting and stimulating. But I care not whether it is an Oliver Franks Committee or any Government action that follows it, I am certain that sooner or later the British public will demand that public inquiries into the rights of the citizen are held by independent tribunals, whatever the Minister responsible may decide afterwards. I would never detract from ministerial responsibility, because Ministers are responsible to Parliament and, in the last analysis, Parliament, too, is responsible. As I have said before, in any position where a Minister has to occupy a quasi-judicial position and come to a quasi-judicial decision, the evidence and the report upon which he bases that decision should be independent.

My Lords, let me say one word about Clause 30. I still do not like Clause 30, though I can do very little about it now. It takes away from the local authority a right that they have had for fifty years. I do not think that is right. I can understand the Minister's reference to an anomaly, as he called it, but I still do not think Clause 30 is right. I still do not think, a; the noble Lord, Lord Conesford, mentioned on a previous stage of the Bill that altering the general direction order will cure the trouble. I am afraid that we now have to accept that the Minister, or the Electricity Authority as the statutory undertakers, will have the undisputed right—disputed by nobody—to put overhead service lines where they please. Our whole reliance has to rest on them. While the present Minister is sitting in that position I do not fear; but Ministers come and Ministers go.

As regards the Consultative Councils I am grateful to the noble Lord for what he has said. When, after the Report stage, I left your Lordships' Chamber, I visited the local showrooms of the Southern Electricity Authority to see if I could find out who was the representative of the Consultative Council in the area in which I live. I found him to be a gentleman named Mr. Wymer, who is, amongst other things, a Bachelor of Science. I will not give his address, because I should think that if I do, and the Press report it, he may have a queue of discontented consumers outside his door. But I am glad that the noble Lord is looking into this matter. Is it right that one individual whose private address is pinned up next to the pay desk of the Southern Electricity Board's office should be the sole means of communication between 100,000 consumers of electrical energy and the Central Consultative Council? That surely cannot be right. I hope the noble Lord will look into it. I think that there should be area Consultative Committees, perhaps within the boundaries of the local authority. If we are going to have Consultative Committees, do not let them be a farce; let them work and let them worry. It is good for an Electricity Authority to have worries—as somebody once said, it is good for a dog to have fleas, because it prevents his cogitating on the fact that he is only a dog.

I am grateful to the noble Lord for what he has done. I am grateful to the noble Lord for his most kind personal references to myself. If, in leading the Opposition on this Bill, I have done my job in a manner that has commended itself to your Lordships, that is all the thanks I require. But may I pay this respectful tribute to the Minister? He came to this House for the first time to pilot a Bill. He piloted the Bill through Second Reading, the Committee stage and the Report stage, and on Third Reading, against, may I say, with what is perhaps ill-modesty, some fierce opposition, with very commendable credit to himself. In my view, that is a Parliamentary performance of no mean order. He has been fortunate in going through the whole gamut of political emotion upon his first appearance at the Dispatch Box in charge of a Bill. He has had brilliant arguments to put forward; he has won victories; he has been defeated in the Division Lobby. Could he want any greater experience than that? The noble Lord the Minister will go down in history as unique—and even with that last event he has produced what is, from the point of view of the general public, one of the best Bills that has been in this House for a very long time.

On Question, Bill passed, and returned to the Commons.

Forward to