HL Deb 15 November 1976 vol 377 cc1013-4

53 Clause 11, page 14, line 22, at end insert ", after the provisions of Schedule (Public Inquiries (Notices and Procedures)) to this Act have been complied with,"

54 Clause 11, page 14, line 29, after "State" insert "after the provisions of Schedule (Public Inquiries (Notices and Procedures)) to this Act have been complied with"

The Commons disagreed to these Amendments for the following Reason:

55 Because provision for a public inquiry procedure is unnecessary.

Lord ORAM

My Lords, with the leave of the House, I beg to move that this House doth not insist on their Amendments Nos. 53 and 54 to which the Commons have disagreed for the Reasons numbered 55.

Moved, That the House doth not insist on the said Amendments, to which the Commons have disagreed for the Reason numbered 55.—(Lord Oram.)

Lord MOTTISTONE

My Lords, my noble friend mentioned this earlier, but having put a public inquiry procedure into the Bill, it seems illogical for us to agree to Commons Reason No. 55. Though I would not suggest for a moment that we would want these Amendments carried through or that one should object to the Commons disagreeing them, I think that for the sake of logic and the record it should somehow be indicated that there is a new reason and not that given in Reason No. 55. This seems unhappy, and I wonder whether the Government can help us here.

Lord DRUMALBYN

My Lords, perhaps the Reason or suggested Amendment could read, "for the reason that a public inquiry is provided for elsewhere".

Lord ORAM

My Lords, what is stated here is the Commons Reason, not the reasons that we are now putting forward in relation to Amendments which we are moving. The point is that there are two kinds of public inquiry in question. One is a much more general one which was inserted at an earlier stage of the Bill in your Lordships' House and which it has now been agreed is not to be insisted upon, and the other is the public inquiry which the Government have proposed today which relates only to objections to proposals to extend the definable dock area. It is a narrower concept of public inquiry but very necessary, as I think noble Lords opposite will agree.

On Question, Motion agreed to.