(1) Forthwith upon the dissolution of the Electricity Commissioners the Minister shall by order constitute a tribunal (in this Act referred to as the Electricity Appeal Tribunal) which shall consist of a chairman who shall be a barrister or solicitor of not less than seven years' standing appointed by the Lord Chancellor and two other members appointed by the Minister, one of whom shall be a person having experience in the generation and supply of electricity and the other of whom shall have had experience in commercial matters.

No member of the Central Authority or, of any Area Board and no person employed by them shall be qualified to be a member of the Tribunal.

(2) It shall be the duty of each Area Board to submit to the Electricity Appeal Tribunal the tariffs from time to time fixed by them and the Tribunal after such enquiry as they think fit may either refuse to confirm any tariff or may confirm it with such alterations if any as they think fit and no such tariff shall come into force until it has been confirmed by the Tribunal.

(3) It shall be the duty of the Electricity Appeal Tribunal to consider—

1. (a) any representation from—
1. (i) any local authority having jurisdiction in the area of any Area Board;
2. (ii) such number of consumers not being less than twenty as the Tribunal think sufficient having regard to the population of the area;
3. (iii) any consumers who in the opinion of the Tribunal sufficiently represent any particular trade business or interest in the area with respect to the prices charged for the supply of electricity by the Central Authority or any Area Board;
2. (b) any representation in regard to the matters specified in the preceding paragraph which may be made to the Electricity Appeal Tribunal by a Consultative Council either upon the request of any person or otherwise;
3. (c) any question which may be referred to it for consideration by the Minister or by the Central Authority.

When the Electricity Appeal Tribunal have considered any such representation of question as aforesaid they shall report to the Minister upon their conclusions and shall make such representations to the Minister in connection with those conclusions as they think expedient.

(4) Any order made under this Section may contain such incidental and consequential provisions for the payment of remuneration to members of the Tribunal by the Central Authority with the approval of the Treasury either by way of annual salary or of fees, and for determining the procedure of the Tribunal as the Minister thinks fit.

The procedure of the Tribunal shall be such as to secure that a member of the Tribunal shall not have any special interest such as may tend to interfere with his impartial consideration of the representation or question made or referred to them.

(5) The Tribunal shall be furnished by the Central Authority with such accommodation as appears to them to be requisite for the proper discharge of their functions and with such clerks, officers and staff as appear to them with the approval of the Treasury, as to numbers to be requisite for the purpose and the Central Authority shall pay to the clerks, officers and staff of the Tribunal such remuneration as they may, with the approval of the Treasury determine.

(6) The Minister and every Electricity Board shall provide the Tribunal with such information and other assistance as the Tribunal think expedient for the purpose of assisting them to discharge their functions.

(7) The Tribunal shall make an annual report to the Minister of their proceedings and the Minister shall lay the report before each House of Parliament together with a statement of any action which has been taken by him in consequence of any recommendation made to him by the Tribunal during the period to which the report relates.

(8) Until such time as an Order is made under this Section the powers and duties conferred and imposed by this Section upon the Electricity Appeal Tribunal upon its constitution shall by virtue of this provision be exercised and discharged by the Electricity Commissioners."

Mr. Shin well:

I beg to move, "That this House doth disagree with the Lords in the said Amendment."

I want to say at once that with the principle embodied in this Amendment from Another place I am in full sympathy. As Members who were associated with me on the Standing Committee will recall, I was consumed with anxiety throughout the proceedings, about adequate safeguards for electricity consumers in respect of tariffs. I have sought all along to promote the most adequate provisions so that electricity consumers should be protected against inflated charges. Therefore, the anxiety which has been displayed by another place on this matter is shared by me.

While it is quite impossible for me to accept the form of the proposed Amendment, I have been considering whether it would be possible to devise an expedient to enable me to respond to the request which has been made. But I am in some difficulty; I am anxious not to impair the arrangements that are provided for in the Bill under Clause 7, in relation to the consultative councils. It is my view, which is shared by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary and my hon. and learned Friend the Solicitor-General, that the presence of a consultative council, charged with the duty of protecting the interests of the consumers, would be sufficient for the purpose. Moreover, the chairman of a consultative council is ipso facto a member of the area board and, therefore, there is direct access and effective liaison. Over and above that, the consultative council can, if it so desires, in the event of disagreement with the area board, make a submission to the Central Authority and, if the disagreement continues, can make representations to the Minister, who is the final court of appeal in this matter. The Minister, be it noted, takes upon himself the functions hitherto possessed by the Electricity Commissioners who, until the Bill becomes an Act, and until the Electricity Commissioners are abolished, are charged with the responsibility of advising the Minister, if necessary, on matters of this sort.

As I say, I was of the opinion that the Consultative Councils were adequate for the purpose, but it may be that some other device is necessary. I have considered whether something could be embodied in the Bill, even at this late stage, and I wonder whether it would not be possible—I am rather thinking aloud on the subject because this has caught us up in a somewhat belated fashion—for the Minister, within the powers vested in him, to possess himself of some independent body of experts—persons who may be regarded as exercising adequate knowledge of electricity and electricity supply and the needs of the consumer; not a consultative council, of course, but an independent body. Their knowledge and wisdom and discretion might be made use of in the event of some disagreement between the consultative council, the area board and the Central Authority to make submissions to the Minister. Rather than that the Minister should decide arbitrarily whether a tariff was desirable or not, he could seize himself of the wisdom that resides in an independent body of the kind that I have indicated. It may be possible by the creation of an ad hoc body of that kind to make it unnecessary to accept this Amendment or to embody in the Bill any other provision.

If it will satisfy hon. Members, I will do this: I will, in the course of today or perhaps tomorrow, before the Bill reaches another place in its final form, look at the matter again. If I can find a form of convenient words which will conform to the principle which is embodied in this Amendment, and which meets my own point of view, which I have expressed very frequently in this regard, then I shall insert that form of words even at this late stage, although it is inconvenient to do so; but if I should not find it possible to find a convenient form of words, I shall have to ask hon. Members to reject this Amendment which has come from another place, and allow me, as Minister, at a later stage, in the event of disagreement emerging as between the consultative council and the area board and the Central Authority to create a kind of independent body, not necessarily a tribunal, but of a more advisory character, so that I should not be the only person to decide a matter affecting tariff rates.

I have tried to express myself as clearly as possible. It has been rather a strain upon me at this late stage, and I must confess to being a little embarrassed by the situation—not very much embarrassed, just a little, as, no doubt, hon. Members can see. But I am anxious to meet the views expressed because they conform with the view that I have indicated so frequently on Standing Committee and in the House in the course of our Debates. If hon. Members will agree to that, I repeat that I will try to get a form of words, but if I fail I shall see that the principle which we now have under review is "incorporated into the administration"—I have got it at last. I hope that assurance will be regarded as satisfactory.

5.15 p.m.

We are obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for his suggestion. It is a little difficult to follow, as we have not seen it on the paper, but, as I understand it, under the Bill as it stands, on page 12, in subsection (8) of Clause 7 to which the right hon. Gentleman refers: A Consultative Council may, after consultation with the Central Authority, make representations to the Minister on any matters arising out of representations made by them to the Central Authority … As I understand the Minister, what he has in mind is to see whether he can set up in his Ministry some body of expert people to whom these representations would be made in the first instance, and who would, so to speak—I will not say in an arbitrary way—be able to advise the Minister after having heard the two sides, so that it would not be actually the Minister's own civil servants or the Minister himself making a decison. I think that the Minister has gone a long way, and, it seems, at first sight, to be a useful way out. I would not have thought that it would have been too difficult for the draftsman to find the necessary form of words to be inserted in the Bill, but, at any rate, if they cannot, we take note of the Minister's promise to set up some such piece of machinery as he has suggested. I presume that he is prepared to do that.

Yes.

There are two points which I wish the right hon. Gentleman would clear up, arising out of his very conciliatory remarks. As the right hon. Gentleman is aware, the Clause which was inserted in Another place imposes on the Electricity Appeal Tribunal two rather different functions. It imposes the function of approving tariff rates as submitted by an area board, and reporting upon complaints of a certain character. Is the proposal which the Minister has just made to the House designed to deal with both of those matters? Does he propose to deal in this way, not only with the complaints, but with the fixing of tariffs by the area board?

indicated assent.

I note that the right hon. Gentleman indicates assent, and I am grateful to him for that. My second point is this: I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will be able to put some such provision in the Bill, and not deal with this administratively, for this reason: If the provision is in the Bill, it will be quite clear that it is the tribunal which is responsible for its decisions and not the right hon. Gentleman. If the right hon. Gentleman deals with it administratively, then, it seems to me, whether he likes it or not, and whether the House likes it or not, he will be responsible to the House for the decisions given by the tribunal, because they will be simply his agents, exercising his powers, which he himself has delegated. The right hon. Gentleman knows well that in another connection there has been a good deal of discussion in this House as to what is his responsibility and what is the responsibility of other bodies. Unless he can put into the Bill a provision which will make it quite clear that Parliament has delegated the responsibility to an outside tribunal, or whatever body it is, his alternative method of dealing with this administratively will not get over that difficulty because he will be answerable to the House for the decisions of what he properly desires to be an independent body. It is with a desire to be helpful on that point that I put this consideration to the House.

I am afraid that I have to strike a rather discordant note, mainly on the point that whereas the Minister is satisfied that the consultative councils will be a reality, I am not now, and have not been in the past, inclined so to believe. Although the Minister is apparently putting a good deal of reliance on these bodies, I cannot help feeling that in fact they will prove not to be the assistance to him or to the consumers which he thinks. It is on that fundamental belief that I wish to put certain considerations to the Minister in the hope that, as far as possible, he may make this body which he has in mind an independent one.

The right hon. Gentleman said that he was satisfied that the safeguarding of the consumers was adequate under the Bill. I want to put in a word here from the point of view of the locality of Sheffield, which I represent, and other localities, particularly with regard to local authorities so far as consumers are concerned. The Minister knows that various local authorities have their own undertakings and that some of them also have their own particular means for dealing with electrical furnaces and so on. What will be the power of the consumer now as far as the consultative councils are concerned? In the Yorkshire area there are to be up to 30 representatives of whom 18 will represent local authorities, and, as I understand it, only one will come from Sheffield. This is vitally important because if the Minister is to rely on the consultative councils I do not think that one local representative from Sheffield will be sufficient.

By way of analogy I would remind the Minister that, as he knows, the consultative councils in the coal industry were not set up for the first six months, and in fact they are not even working now after seven months. The first point is how long is it to be before these consultative councils are set up. I think it is most necessary to have some form of tribunal, but I cannot see why the suggestion contained in the Amendment would not do. With regard to the question of independence, whatever body is established it will be of no vise at all from the point of view of the consumer if it is set up by the Minister within the framework of his Department. If there is to be real benefit for the consumers it is essential that they should be able to go to an independent tribunal.

I cannot follow this point. Since the Amendment is not being pressed, I do not want to come back to it to too great an extent, but under the proposal as put forward by the Opposition the tribunal is still responsible to the Minister. The actual words are: When the Electricity Appeal Tribunal have considered any such representation or question as aforesaid they shall report to the Minister upon their conclusions … In view of this it seems to me that the Amendment is not in line with the hon. and gallant Gentleman's reasoning.

The hon. Gentleman will see in Subsection (2) of the proposed Clause that on price-fixing the tribunal is entirely independent. Whatever the Minister says in regard to price-fixing the tribunal has the last word. My hon. Friend the Member for Kingston-upon-Thames (Mr. Boyd-Carpenter) made that point when he was discussing the two distinct functions, and it is the question of the independence of this body which I want to emphasise. We have had an assurance from the Minister which goes some way in this matter, but if he is to rely on these consultative councils and on a tribunal set up by him which merely advises him as to prices, I am not at all certain that this will satisfy the consumers of the area from which I come, Sheffield, or other consumers of that kind. Until we see some alternative I am not prepared to admit that there is any reason why the Minister could not accept the Amendment as it now stands. The speech which the right hon. Gentleman made was virtually in support of the Amendment. He said that the matter had "caught up on him" and that may be so because he has other things to do and had not perhaps applied himself to it by the time the forms were produced. If he had applied himself to it I believe that he would have found that what he is seeking—and what he said at the end of his speech he had found—is down here in black and white. With that caveat, I put it most sincerely to the Minister that he should see that this tribunal is independent and not merely a creature of his Department.

I am glad that the Minister is reconsidering this matter because I have never been satisfied that the consultative councils were the right answer, as I said in the opening sentences of my Second Reading speech. I am not at all sure that the Minister has been satisfied either. In Committee he once said that the consultative councils were a very good form of liaison with the consumer—"Contact between the consumer and the authority responsible for distribution" were his actual words. I agree this accurately and comprehensively defines what they will be.

Now there are one or two suggestions which I should like to make. There are two weaknesses I see in the consultative councils under Clause 7, the first of which is that I think there should be some form of published report. It is true that they may send forward reports which might eventually accompany the reports of the Minister and of the central and area boards and reach this House, but this provision is permissive whereas in the tribunal we suggest it would be compulsory for them to report once a year. I believe that it would very much strengthen the position if reports had to be submitted annually in this way. Although the chairman of the consultative council may be also on the area board, unless he is a man of very great character there might be a dangerous tendency for him to be told, "It is not in the interests of the service on the whole that you should send this report forward. You had better think about it again." My other suggestion is that whatever organisation the Minister sets up should be at a level equal to that of the central board. The consultative councils are not on that level and cannot talk to the central board about the prices to be charged by that board. They may discuss area board prices but not those of the central board, and I feel that we need something at a rather higher level.

5.30 p.m.

I have listened to the Minister with very great care, and I was, of course, rather drawn in my outlook towards him when he informed us in such a fatherly way at the beginning of his remarks, that as his Bill went forward, he began to take a rather more kindly interest in the consumer. It was a new move on the Minister's part, and it naturally drew me a little closer to him. I am in a very interesting position on this Amendment, because we have here an Amendment, which, no doubt, does good to the consumers in my Constituency, and, indeed, to those all over the country. As I understand it, from what the Minister said, if we are to accept this Amendment a great deal more power to get in contact with the Minister and to place arguments before him, will be provided. I would also say that, there is a definite point to be considered as far as the local authorities are concerned. If I might have the attention of the Minister, I also should like to emphasise what has been emphasised by my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Ecclesall (Major Roberts) about the local authorities. There is some concern on this matter of consultation with the Minister by local authorities, and that concern is not confined to my constituency but applies all over the country. From that point of view, I feel I am bound to point out that if this Amendment is not accepted I very much doubt in the first place whether the consumers will be pleased, and, in the second place, whether the local authorities, especially in the Western area, will be satisfied. That is why I would like to vote to have this excellent Amendment in the Bill.

Let us look at the Minister's proposition. He used a curious phrase—that he has only just "caught up" with the idea of this Amendment. He admitted quite frankly that he was thinking aloud. In other words, in this Amendment, which no doubt is a very good one, and which was only passed after being carefully thought out and discussed in Another place, the Minister is only catching up with what it means. It is an Amendment that I should have thought should undoubtedly have been in the original Bill. I am in the' position that unless I support the Lords in this Amendment I shall catch it from my constituency and from the whole of the local authorities, and I shall be blamed for supporting a Minister who admitted in his own speech he had really not thought out what the Amendment meant. That is the position in which I find myself.

Then the Minister says, "Oh yes, I will put up some sort of an advisory body which will consult with me and which I can send round to and get advice from." I notice that the Minister does not like me to draw attention to this matter, and I did not expect that he would, not for a minute. But what actually happens? He said he will try to have some such body and that we have got to trust him. If I went to a meeting in my Division and said that I accepted the Minister's assurance because he was a nice person on whom I could rely, the people would shout an awful lot of the nasty things at me which generally they say about him. I believe the Minister when he said that he would do nothing very quickly and that he would like to look at this matter. But it is possible for this Government to do even more stupid things, than they have done in the past, and that is a matter which I wish to emphasise in my desire to have this Amendment in the Bill. I have not yet heard any reason why it should be kept out. It is a good Amendment, and if it is not put in the Bill it will weaken the position of the consumer.

Once again, we are being asked to allow the Minister to do what he says he will do and have this advisory body set up some time at his discretion. We are asked to give powers under which he and he alone can decide the matter and Parliament will have absolutely nothing to do with the set-up of this body. That is going on in Bill after Bill, and I say quite frankly, without any desire to quarrel with the Minister or to interfere with his new advance towards the consumer, because in that I desire to encourage him. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] I am glad that, at last, from hon. Members opposite I am getting encouragement in urging the Minister to do something for the consumer. At any rate, I have gained something as far as the rag-tag and bobtail of the Socialists are concerned. I notice that I have not got the Communist Party with me, but they care even less for the consumer than the ordinary Socialist Back Bencher.

The support which I have received from hon. Members opposite bears out how very right I am in saying that I would like this Amendment in the Bill, because it would safeguard the consumers, and I do not think that any Minister in any circumstances ought to be trusted with the type of powers which the right hon. Gentleman asks for. It is completely and absolutely wrong. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] I am glad that on that point I have gained converts from hon. Members opposite in the very short time that I have been speaking. I should like to add that I am not going to spend my time going round my constituents and supporting the Minister. I really am not such a mug as that. I have no intention of supporting him in his wish to be able to grind down the face of my constituents to defy the local authority and to give bad and short supplies in the same manner as his incompetence has led to the same thing in other directions, as with coal.

No one knows better than the hon. Member for Torquay (Mr. C. Williams) how gladly I would avail myself of the opportunity of replying to him. In spite of his persuasive appeal, I must ask the House, as I have already done, to reject the Amendment. I am extremely sorry that I should disappoint the hon. Member, but, no doubt, he will convey his disappointment to his disappointed constituents. There is litttle more I require to say. I have already given an assurance to the House that I will look at the form of words and see if something convenient can be found and, if not, we must do this thing administratively.

My principal reason in rising to address the House is to confute quite definitely the suggestion that the consultative councils will be mere facades. They will be nothing of the sort, and, indeed, I would direct attention to what is an inescapable fact, that if we do accept the Amendment in this form of words it would completely emasculate the consultative councils, because they would have no authority or prestige whatever. It would be obvious that instead of sitting and consulting with each other on complaints which are made by consumers in respect of tariffs and the like, they would immediately refer these matters to an area board and then disagree with the area board in any circumstances, so that they might make their submission to the central authority and the Minister, well knowing that the matter originally raised, would go before an independent tribunal. That, I say, would impair the prestige of the consultative councils. We intend to make the councils worth while, so that they may adequately perform the service for which they were created.

I would like to point out that the right hon. Gentleman said the same thing about the consumers' councils for coal, but they have not yet started to function. Have we any guarantee that the consultative councils will be set up by 1st April?

I cannot give a firm commitment as to the specific date by which the consultative councils will be appointed, but it will certainly be done as soon as possible. Naturally, I have to consult a great many organisations of a representative character. Indeed, I have pointed out to the hon. and gallant Member for Ecclesall (Major Roberts), who mentioned a point about local authorities' anxiety to protect the interests of the consumer, that I have to consult many local authorities who would be represented on the consultative councils. That itself will be a safeguard for the consumer.

I would like to make it plain that we cannot expect that every trifling complaint that comes before a consultative council and upon which there may be disagreement with an area board or even the central authority, can be adjudicated upon by an independent tribunal. That would make life unbearable for the tribunal and intolerable for the Minister, who must depend for guidance upon the tribunal, whether he accepts its decision or not. Indeed, one would hardly expect that every kind of tariff revision, however minor in character, should come before an independent body, whether of an advisory character or of an arbitrary character. I wish to make that point plain.

Finally, I would put this point to hon. Members. Whether they like the provisions of the Bill or not, it has been agreed after protracted discussion that the central authority, the British Electricity Authority, must pay its way taking one year with another. Clearly, if that obligation is imposed on the Central Authority it is impossible to leave the matter to some other body to determine specifically what tariff rates should be imposed. It would make the position of the Central Authority impossible. Taking all those factors into account,. it appears to me that we must try to effect a reasonable and sensible compromise, bearing in mind that it is the desire of everyone here and in the country to protect with the most effective and adequate safeguards, the interests of the consumer. That is our desire.

Let us try to seek a reasonable compromise. That is what I am endeavouring to do. When the hon. Member for Torquay gibed at me because I said that I had just caught up with an idea, I did not mean the idea of protecting the interests of the consumer. That has been stated over and over again in our Debates. I meant the idea of finding a sensible compromise between the Amendment on the Paper and the other propositions that have been made to me.

The right hon. Gentleman has very courteously given way to me. When he said that he had only just caught up with the idea, I never, thought he meant the idea of protecting the interests of the consumer. I thought he meant the idea that the Amendment made the Bill much fairer than it was before. I thought the right hon. Gentleman meant that he was gradually catching up with the idea that it was more just to put the Amendment in.

That was the interpretation of the hon. Gentleman. It did not happen to be mine and it was not in my mind. I fully appreciate the desire of everybody to respond to the views I have expressed about seeking a reasonable compromise. In the light of that desire, and in the circumstances, I will do the very best I can to respond in my turn. I may fail in securing the precise form of words but I give again the assurance that if that should happen I shall administratively, and as rapidly as possible, try to secure some device to conform as nearly as possible to the principle embodied in the Amendment.

Remaining Lords Amendments agreed to [Several with Special Entries].

Committee appointed to draw up reasons to be assigned to the Lords for disagreeing to certain of their Amendments to the Bill: Colonel Clarke, Commander Galbraith, Mr. Messer, Mr. Palmer, and Mr. Shinwell. Three to be the quorum.—[Mr. Shinwell.]

To withdraw immediately.

Reasons for disagreeing to the Lords Amendments reported, and agreed to; to be communicated to the Lords.