Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

13° Julii, 1927.]

top of the said bank and flooding the lands within the areas of jurisdiction of your Petitioners or some of them. Your Petitioners therefore submit that the One Hundred Foot River should be restored to its original width and depth and properly maintained and that no additional obstruction to the escape of flood waters should be allowed. Your Petitioners submit that looking to the future and having regard to the very large amount of money that is to be expended upon the said works the best scheme for the improvement of the said River ought to be adopted rather than merely a makeshift which experience has already shown to be inefficacious."

Mr. St. John Raikes.] You can stop now for a moment. There are just one or two sub-paragraphs; there is (D) in paragraph 9, that is on page 7.

[Continued.

posed by Clause 4 (1) of the Bill are entirely inadequate and ought to be increased." Now up to date I have been reading Petitions in which they say that to charge the Uplands with anything is most unfair and that the provisions ought to be deleted from the Bill. Here is a stout champion whom I at once call to my aid who says that those provisions are inadequate and that the Uplands ought to pay more. More power to my learned friend's elbow. "That the contributions required to be provided under Clause 4 of the Bill ought to be defrayed as expenses for special county purposes charged in the case of contributions under Sub-clause (1) on the upland area of the county and in the case of contributions under Sub-clause (2) on the area of the county after excluding the lowlands."

Mr. St. John Raikes.] Paragraph 11 please.

Mr. Macmillan.] "Your Petitioners object to the powers proposed by Clause 3 of the Bill to be conferred upon the Ouse Board with respect to the levying of drainage rates. The principle of rating

Mr. Macmillan.] "That having regard to the heavy burden that will in any case be placed upon the lands within the Ouse district the contribution out of moneys provided by Parliament should be an amount at least equal to one-half of the Board's carrying expenses in for out the specified works and one-half of the cost of maintenance thereof for a period of ten years from the date of completion and that the payment of the contribution shall be obligatory."

Mr. St. John Raikes.] Then (F).

Mr. Macmillan.] (F) "That having regard to the benefit which will be derived by the uplands from the proposed works " -that is a very striking paragraph. I thought the Uplands would derive no benefit; some of the other Petitioners say they would derive no benefit.

Mr. St. John Raikes.] We know better. Mr. Macmillan.] I was quite sure that the Petition would develop as we went on and that the contest would be confined ultimately to the other side of the Table than between me and the other side of the Table." That having regard to the benefit which will be derived by the Uplands "a sentiment which I would commend to my learned friend Mr. Tyldesley Jones.

Mr. St. John Raikes.] Do not hesitate -there is more to come.

Mr. Macmillan.] I am much obliged, "from the proposed works and the immense amount of upland water to be dealt with, the contributions to be paid by or in respect of the uplands as pro

drainage purposes according to acreage is almost universally adopted" -this has really been covered Mr. Raikes; it is a general point.

Mr. St. John Raikes.] If anyone has taken it you need not read it, I do not think they have-no one else has taken it yet.

Mr. Macmillan.] If you please, "in the area proposed to be comprised in the Ouse District is the fairest method and has proved the most satisfactory in practice. No sufficient reason can be shown for a provision compelling drainage rates to be levied according to rateable value. Further your Petitioners submit that whatever principle or method of rating is adopted

[ocr errors]

Mr. St. John Raikes.] That is a minor matter and the remainder relates to minor matters. Perhaps you would just read 12.

"Your Peti

Mr. Macmillan.] 12, tioners strongly object to such of the provisions of Clause 15 of the Bill as impose any restrictions upon the construction of new or the improvement or alteration of existing drainage works (including any structure appliance or channel for the discharge of water from drainage areas) by any of your Petitioners who are drainage authorities and

13° Julii, 1927.]

submit that the same ought not to be allowed."

Mr. St. John Raikes.] I need not I think trouble my friend further, my Lord. There are some further points of a minor character.

Mr. Riley.] I should like to ask whether the area represented by the Middle Level Commissioners is synonymous with the Low Level Land.

Mr. St. John Raikes.] No, Sir; it represents about half of the Low Level Land. If you look at the beginning of the Petition you see we represent five separate bodies, the Middle Level, the Norfolk Commissioners, the Marshland Smeeth and so on. They are all Fen land and on the about half of the proposed to form District, and we about half the cost.

whole we represent Fen land that it is into the Drainage are going to bear

Mr. Riley.] You represent that half the land should be subject to 6d. per

acre.

Mr. St. John Raikes.] We shall be subject, of course, to the 6d., but the thing we object to is the 2s. 6d. an

acre.

Mr. Macmillan.] A very simple way to explain it is if you look at the map, my learned friend practically represents the green, the brown, and the pink, but none of the yellow. Most of the brown but not all of it.

Now the last Petition I have on my fist is that of the London and North Eastern Railway Company. The London and North Eastern Railway Company's point in their Petition is that they complain first of all that the recommendation of the Commission on the subject of the rating of Railways, has not been given effect to as properly understood.

Mr. Tyldesley Jones.] As stated in the Report.

Mr. Macmillan.] Put it as you please. The paragraph dealing with Railway rating has not been given effect to. Then they say that the Railway Company's position ought to be recognised by giving them a special protection in the matter of rating.

Mr. Tyldesley Jones.] No, by continuing the protection we have got today—that is the point. That summarises it, my Lord, sufficiently for the present purpose. I can develop it when

the witness comes.

[Continued.

Mr. Macmillan.] I am sure my learned friend can.

Mr. Tyldesley Jones.] The third point is that you are exempt from paying us compensation even if you damage our Railway.

Mr. Macmillan.] Yes. I think I may say quite fairly, Mr. Tyldesley Jones, that you are against the Bill if it has not got such proper recognition of your position, but that you are not challenging the works or their necesssity, or that aspect of it at all.

Mr. Tyldesley Jones.] No; merely protective provisions.

Mr. Macmillan.] That, of course, is a clause matter, although you are quite entitled to be heard against preamble, which means protection.

Mr. Tyldesley Jones.] Yes; and the same is the case with the Midland and Great Northern Railway's Joint Committee, which is the last Petition.

Mr. Macmillan.] Now, my Lord, I fear that I have detained the Committee at very great length in opening this Bill, but I think you will recognise that it has been necessary to spend at least an unusually long time in opening it. My hope is that the time will not have been thrown away, because there is a very large amount of matter which is common ground to us all which will have to be stated and expounded once and for all. The main points I have rehearsed more than once, and I shall not rehearse them again, but the position in which I should like to leave the Bill in the hands of the Committee, at the conclusion of my address, is this, that the Ministry, indeed the Government, having received the result of the Commission which was appointed at the desire of all parties concerned-that there should be an inquiry by the responsible Commission was desired by all

that Commission having reported and made their recommendations, the Ministry was approached and desired to embody the result of that Commission in a Bill. The resolution on this subject quite properly points out that there is not unanimity in the area on the subject of the terms of the Bill, but that the Ministry should bring forward a Bill was the unanimous desire, I think, of all concerned. I shall read the actual resolution, which is of the Board, that is to say of the old Board, the existing Board, under the 1920 Order, which, of course, represented most of the

13° Julii, 1927.]

interests at any rate in the area, and this was their resolution of the 21st December, 1925: "That whilst representatives of various areas of the Board have decided objections to some of the recommendations of the Commission, the Board hope that the Ministry will proceed with the Bill at once based upon the Commissioners' Report." That is a very significant exhortation if I may say so to the Ministry. It recognises there are divergent views as to the terms of the Bill, but on the other hand that a Bill should be brought into Parliament on the basis of the Commissioners' Report is the unanimous desire of the Board, which Board in turn, having regard to its composition, you will remember its 42 members drawn from this area generally, was well representative of the differing interests concerned. The Bill you may therefore take it, whatever be the controversies arising on certain of its terms, is promoted at the desire of this district. It is. moreover in conformity in general, not in every detail, with the recommendations of that Commission which was appointed at the wish of the people of this district, and it is now put before you as the measure which upon the best advice we could obtain, is best designed to remedy the existing state of affairs, to avert danger to an important part of this realm, and to bring about a solution of the lengthened controversies which have for so long embittered this region and prevented the execution of works which all alike as we submit, are concerned to preserve. It has not achieved the result of satisfying all the interests involved. I do not think anyone anticipated that it would, because unanimity in this area is only likely to be attained in the Millenium, if then, and probably this Bill may be commended, to you as compromises are so often commended, because it has been said more than once that the criterion of a really good compromise is that it pleases nobody. This measure seems to have that virtue because judging by the number of criticisms-I may point out criticisms which conflict with each other -which have developed in my learned friend's consideration of this measure, it does not apparently placate all their views. But the measure before you now, is a Government measure upon which the Government is prepared to put down as their contribution one and a

[Continued.

quarter million sterling in aid of this district. Is that money to be disregarded or thrown away? Surely not. Surely it is desirable that this opportunity should be taken to have these works carried out, and this great beneficial scheme completed? The Minister does not profess to be wedded to every word or every clause in this Bill in the precise form. in which it stands, but he does submit to you for your approval the general policy embodied in this Bill. It will now be for this honourable Committee to hear first of all the evidence which we shall adduce in support of the measure as it stands, and then the evidence which will be critical of the case and the speeches which will be made upon that, and then the task of the Committee will be to judge whether they are to give the seal of their approval to this policy embodied in the Bill, and thereafter if you see fit to pass the Preamble, we shall no doubt have to spend some time in dealing with particular matters arising on particular clauses; but I venture to think at the moment the most useful thing would be to concentrate attention on questions of policy and principle, and to keep this in view rather than to lose ourselves, if I may say so, in the bogs of this district.

With the assistance of my learned friends I will now call the evidence, and I think it will be best to bring before you the engineering evidence which 1 shall put before you through Mr. Binnie in order that you may understand the works with which we are concerned.

Mr. Turner.] My Lord, I am appearing here on behalf of the Cambridge Corporation, and I think it might be a convenient moment now, subject to your Lordships' view, that the question which arose yesterday with regard to the alteration of the map might be mentioned to your Lordship.

Chairman.] Yes.

Mr. Turner.] My Lord, the question is really one which arises on the Standing Orders, and it relates to the amendment of the map which was mentioned by my learned friend at page 29 of yesterday's proceedings. My Lord, what was said was this: My learned friend Mr. Macmillan said at the bottom of the first column on that page "May I just explain? I may clear up this matter and we will discard if we may from our weak suit at once. The position is that when we had to make our deposits we had not

13° Julii, 1927.]

in

the advantage of the complete survey. When our Bill was prepared, involving, as it did, a discrimination between Uplands and Lowlands, we at once structed the Ordnance Survey Departmen of Southampton to make an accurate survey carrying out the proposals of the Commission, which was that the point of dilimitation should be the contour line 20 feet above ordnance datum." My Lord, let me say at once that that may have been the proposal of the Commission, but there was nothing in the notice for the Bill and there is nothing in the Bill itself which refers to the 20 feet ordnance datum line. The whole matter is dealt with both under the notice and in the Bill by reference to the deposited map, and what I understand the point made by my learned friend to be is this, that in preparing the Bill and in preparing the deposited map, owing to the lack of sufficient information, the promoters have made a mistake, and upon discovering that mistake they desire to remedy it, not even by notice given to us even a few days ago, but they desire to remedy it in the Course of the opening of the Bill by my learned friend. Now, my Lord, I am bound to ask for a ruling upon the submission that I am about to make now for this reason, that this being a Joint Committee of the two Houses, this is the only opportunity that I shall have of raising this question, and the submission that I desire to make and upon which I desire to ask for a ruling, is this, that it is not open to my learned friend under the Scanding Orders to make the amendinent which he now seeks to make. My Lord, the position of this Bill under the Standing Orders, is made clear by the Order which was passed by the House of Commons on the 1st April, which was in these terms: "that the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills do examine the Ouse Drainage Bill with respect to compliance with the Standing Orders relative to Private Bills." I understand that that is the usual form of Order in the case of a Hybrid Bill, and it makes it clear, indeed if it were necessary to be made clear, that the promoters of a Bill of this kind are required to see that they comply with Standing Orders on Private Bills, at all events so far as those Standing Orders are applicable. That is the accepted practice, and is stated in Erskine May as being the prac

[Continued.

tice. The amendment which is proposed is this, your Lordship will remember, that upon the map as deposited, the whole of the borough of Cambridge for which I appear was upon the land which was coloured blue. The effect of the amendment is to extend the yellow or south level land by a projecting tongue which goes down the valley of the river and is for the first time made to include certain lands in the borough of Cambridge. The effect of that is two-fold: first of all it means that under Clause 3 these additional lands in the borough of Cambridge will for the first time be made liable to payment of a drainage rate. As blue land the drainage rate did not apply. As soon as they coloured yellow on the map, those lands become subject to the drainage rate. That is a matter, of course, which affects not so much the corporation for whom I appear, but it affects the owners and occupiers of those lands, whom I shall submit in a moment were entitled under the Standing Orders to have notice of the proposal to impose this charge upon them; but so far as the Corporation is concerned, the proposed amendment has this additional effect, that under Clause 3 of the Bill there are certain duties in Sub-clause 4 which are cast upon the corporation itself as the rating authority, because. in the borough of Cambridge the corporation will be the rating authority under the Rating and Valuation Act, 1925. On being required by the Ouse Board they are to undertake the service of notices and demand notes, and are to undertake a number of other duties in connection with the collection of the rate, so that the Cambridge Corporation are themselves directly affected by the change which it is proposed to make.

Now, my Lord, the submission that I have to make may be put very shortly, and it is this: that the proposed amendment most clearly was not covered by the notices for the Bill, and that no notice of a proposal to charge these owners and occupiers has been given to them, in order to give them an opportunity of making any representations which they might desire to make before your Lordship's Committee. My Lord, in the notice for the Bill these were the terms so far as they are material. The paragraph begins: "To empower the Ouse Board to levy, collect and recover rates upon and from owners, lessees and occupiers of lands"

13° Julii, 1927.]

Mr. Macmillan.] I am afraid I must rise to a point of order. My learned friend is really taking a Standing Order point just now, which is not a point for this Committee at all; it is a point for the Examiner. By learned friend, I think, inadvertently made a mistake. This alteration which has been made in the Bill has been made, no doubt, since the deposit of the plan, but this Bill will have to undergo the scrutiny of the Second House Examiner, although it is a Hybrid Bill, and I should also add just to keep this in mind, there is also this further specialty, that when this Bill goes back to the House of Commons it will be referred to Committee again, a Committee of the whole House, which is quite a specialty of a Bill of this sort, and these alterations could be made there, and again even upon that, there could be a report of non-compliance even at that stage. But the point that my friend is taking just now is not a point I respectfully submit for this Committee, and if there is any hardship that he is likely to suffer, I am afraid this is not the place to get the remedy.

Chairman.] I was waiting till later on to point out to learned Counsel that he would have the opportunity of going before the Examiner again, should this Committee insert anything into this Bill which turns out to be a violation of Standing Orders.

Mr. Macmillan.] Yes. Your Lordship sees that nothing has yet been done. I have complied with Standing Orders up to this stage. I am asking to be allowed to do something. If you see fit to allow me to do that, then the point will arise whether the Standing Orders have been complied with in that respect, and objection will be taken at the appropriate stage; but at the moment there has been no failure to comply with Standing Orders.

Mr. Turner.] If my friend is here asking your Committee to allow him to make a particular amendment, then I submit I am entitled to put before your Lordship on the merits reasons why that amendment should not be made. That is a separate and distinct question from the point which arises upon the Standing Orders. The point which my friend raised on Standing Orders, is a point which of course I had not overlooked, and I should not deem it within my province to occupy your time over a question arising out of Standing Orders, if

[Continued.

I had another opportunity at another time, of going before the Examiner. I understand from my learned friend that ! shall have an opportunity of going before the Examiner, but with great deference and respect that is not the case. In the case of a Hybrid Bill the only possibility of going before the Examiner before the Bill goes to the second House, is by an Order of the House, an Order which may or may not be made, as it was indeed in the first House. It was only by an Order, that the Bill went to the Examiner at all.

Chairman.] It is the practice of the House to send the Bill to the Examiner.

Mr. Turner.] I am much obliged to your Lordship for saying that, but the only point that I desire to make is this, that my right is not an absolute right to go before the Examiner; it is only contingent; it is contingent upon the making of an Order which it may be it is the common practice of the House to make, but I am bound to say that this may be the only opportunity which I shall have of making a submission anywhere, notwithstanding that practice of the House; this may be the only opportunity which I should have anywhere of making a submission with regard to non-compliance with Standing Orders, and that is why it is I ventured to intervene in your Lordship's proceedings this afternoon.

Chairman.] You see the Bill has not been before the House of Lords yet.

Mr. Turner.] No, I appreciate that. Chairman.] And before it gets through that House it has to go before the Examiner at least that is my information; I am not an expert officer of the House.

Mr. Turner.] I gather, my Lord, that we are all on rather unfamiliar ground in regard to this point, that the whole procedure of seeking to alter at such a late stage a deposited map, and the scope of the Bill, is one which, to say the least, is not a very familiar proceeding, and one which I should venture to submit to you ought not to be encouraged, because I have in mind not only the rights of the Cambridge Corporation for whom I more directly appear, but the much more serious-I was going to use such a strong phrase as denial of justice to the owners and occupiers of the lands which it is sought to rate, and who most likely will never have any opportunity of making any representa

« ZurückWeiter »