LORDS AMENDMENT (Hansard, 23 October 1968)

§ LORD HUGHES

My Lords, I beg to move that this House doth not insist upon its Amendment No. 100 to which the Commons have disagreed. I would also move that the House doth agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 101 to the words so restored to the Bill. It is, in effect, a tidying-up Amendment in consequence of the restoration to the Bill of Clause 48. It was proposed in another place to restore to Schedule 18 the provision which had been removed by the Lords on Report, that the proviso to subsection (2) of Section 13 of the 1962 Act should be repealed. That subsection empowers the British Waterways Board to manufacture for sale plant or equipment as used in connection with inland waterways, and to repair such 1534 plant or equipment. The proviso stipulates that such activities must not it elude barges or other vessels. However, Clause 48 entirely covers (without the proviso the ground covered by Section 1312) of the 1962 Act, which is accordingly rendered completely superfluous. The Government's Amendment there for has the effect that the whole of subsection (2) of Section 13 of the 1962 Act, not just the proviso, shall be repealed

My Lords, I think it would be not inappropriate that I should say, as we come to the final stage of a very long process, how much we on the Government side have appreciated the way in which to-day's proceedings have gone. It would have been rather difficult, per laps, some months ago to predict that it this final stage we should conclude our proceedings on this Bill in a spirit of such complete harmony (shall I say), even though that does not necessarily mean unity of viewpoint. It is, however, quite consistent with the way in which the noble Lord, Lord Nugent of Guildford, and his colleagues have acted through-out in their proceedings on this Bill. I feel that it would be going a little too far if I were to say that any of us felt, in seeing the last of this Bill, the we were departing from an old friend, but certainly my own personal feeling is that life is going to be a little empty without it.

I should be surprised if the con acts and discussions and arguments which I have had with the noble Lord, Lord Nugent of Guildford, could be continued in future on Scottish legislation. I doubt very much whether his noble friends behind would welcome such a reversal of the trend to nationalism, but perhaps the remedy is that my excursions out of Scotland should not be solely, geographical but should continue from time to time to be legislative also. I certainly should welcome very much the opportunity of continuing what has been a very pleasant operation. In saying so, I know that I speak for all my noble friends on the Front Bench, and if we must continue to have political disagreements (and I hope that we shall; otherwise we are in fact saying that we do not wish to have political Parties) I hope that they will be continued in the ray in which we have managed to conduct 1535 this very lengthy and difficult Bill. My Lords, I beg to move.

§ LORD NUGENT OF GUILDFORD

My Lords, for the reasons given by the noble Lord we do not disagree with the Commons on this Amendment. We especially appreciated the coda which the noble Lord, Lord Hughes, added to his speech in such a pleasant, charming and generous way, and we would reciprocate from this side. This has been a long, difficult and arduous Bill. As he says, we are already beginning to wonder what we used to do with our lives before the Transport Bill floated into it, but no doubt other things will come along to fill them up.

I think my colleagues and I would agree that we feel that the achievements on the Bill have been, to a large extent, due to the noble Lord, Lord Hughes, and his noble colleagues, Lord Beswick, Lord Winterbottom and Lord Stonham (we wish he were with us to-day), for the skill with which they have handled the debates here in the House, and obviously other debates which must have taken place behind the scenes. The result is, 1 think, that this House has carried out its proper job of revision in an effective way, and it has been something in which we, like the noble Lord, have been glad to take part. Before Lord Hughes floats off back to Scottish affairs again perhaps I might ask whether the Minister of Transport would give him a special authorisation which would bring him back occasionally to English affairs, and allow him to travel the 400 miles and join us—he should cover the "ton mileage" situation anyhow. For these reasons we shall not disagree with the Commons decision on Schedule 18.