Mr Charles Mapp: Yesterday evening, the hon. Member for Ormskirk (Sir D. Glover), in speaking to an Amendment, said, " Do not let us be dogmatic and over-political ". He then proceeded to make a political speech. I will not do that. I wish to consider the Amendment. It is highly impracticable. It has precisely the opposite meaning to that given by the hon. Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. Waddington). It...
Mr Charles Mapp: The fault of politicians is that they frequently argue that black is white. The hon. Gentleman is asserting that because I said one thing I must automatically mean another. I said that it is likely, indeed possible, that certain operations conducted in various estuaries might lend themselves to be run by people other than the local port authority. I am not so dogmatic as to say that other...
Mr Charles Mapp: If the photographer needed permission to photograph passers-by, and he satisfied the requirements resulting in permission being given to him, then what he is doing is completely lawful. However, if the House states in legislation that that photographer must be the only appellant, as it were, and the only photographer allowed to be there, then, because of that legislation, he would be in a...
Mr Charles Mapp: The hon. Gentleman must not mislead the House. I am not a lawyer. I understand these things as a layman, as the hon. Gentleman does. The authority would not be able to apply for an Order. Never mind whether there will be a set of services or not, it would not be able to apply to the Minister for an Order.
Mr Charles Mapp: The Amendment expressly says that it must not be a monopoly supplier. It is a complete veto. I am not concerned so much about the environment. There could be people wanting to provide services just as good as the Ports Authority, or there could be others who did not wish to enter into it. But the words of the Amendment do not lead to the conclusion which the hon. Gentleman is arguing. This...
Mr Charles Mapp: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. It arises from Amendment No. 66. I have delayed my submission because I have been consulting Erskine May. The words of the Amendment are precisely similar to those of Amendment No. 6, which was moved yesterday and rejected. The only material difference is that Amendment No. 6 referred to subsection (7) whereas this Amendment refers to subsection (1)....
Mr Charles Mapp: I can see the hon. Gentleman's purist argument on the grounds of theory. Has he related what he is saying to the practical effects which are taking place in the ports? I am not unfamiliar with Manchester. In the pursuit of its normal activities as a port it is rendering services to an associated canal company which are advantageous to that company and to the port of Manchester. I am not too...
Mr Charles Mapp: Why should it not manufacture tugs? In the Mersey Estuary it is part of the undertaking of both port authorities. One cannot turn a port around without tugs or all sorts of services. It is no good being hyperbolic about this. The authority will want tugs, and if it cannot buy them competitively, it will have to build them itself. It is as simple as that.
Mr Charles Mapp: asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what are the maximum penalties for offences of vandalism; whether he is satisfied that these penalties are adequate in present conditions; and if he will make a statement.
Mr Charles Mapp: I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, but for the more common offences of general vandalism, would he try to encourage the flexible use of attendance centres and, if necessary, detention centres for young people who are doing this sort of thing so frequently in our districts?
Mr Charles Mapp: The hon. Gentleman is speaking of the Tuesday. Would he recommend the speech of his hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Edward M. Taylor), in which he said: I can assure the hon. Gentlemen that as from now, so far as I am concerned, we certainly will be working to rule in this Committee."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Standing Committee D, 17th March, 1970; c. 1115.] Perhaps he would...
Mr Charles Mapp: Has the working party considered in detail the difficulty of unfit houses in those towns with a heavy backlog? If so, has my hon. Friend anything in mind so that those old towns could have some particular treatment in the near future?
Mr Charles Mapp: Does my right hon. Friend realise that enforcement is the method rather than education in these days? Will he be good enough to consider whether a tine-camera fronted fore and aft on a moving police vehicle may be more effective in identifying offenders, and then the courts could deal with such things rather than having too much education which is being lost?
Mr Charles Mapp: I take a somewhat different view about the Clause from that taken by the hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley). There is a germ in the Clause which commends itself to me. For that reason, although I do not think that the Clause as a whole can be accepted, I ask the Government seriously to consider whether there should not be a complete and exhaustive review of one aspect of...
Mr Charles Mapp: I am amazed that the members of the Textile Council, some of whom are knowledgeable folk, but not all of whom have the breadth of knowledge wanted in an industry of this kind, should, by this proposal, imply a split of the industry into two areas. There would be a positive premium for that part of the industry in the intermediate areas, but nothing for the three-fourths outside those areas....
Mr Charles Mapp: But the hon. Gentleman must look at the implications. I could, with some reservation, see the point made by the Textile Council if there had been a blanket recommendation accepted by the Government, but, once there is not a blanket recommendation and there is discrimination, for good reasons, in its judgment, for a particular part of the county, we cannot follow the logic of the argument in...
Mr Charles Mapp: Considering the urban nature of the Question, would my hon. Friend outline the costs of motorway building including land? Would he agree that the overall cost would be considerably higher than the figures he gave in an earlier Answer about agricultural land?
Mr Charles Mapp: I should like to relate the Amendment, cruel as it is, to the problems of a town faced with difficult problems of clearance of unfit houses. Where there is a great backlog of unfit houses, the Amendment provides for the additional cost of providing new units to fall wholly on the municipal tenants. I should like to take as an illustration my own town, in which in 1955 nearly half the houses...
Mr Charles Mapp: asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will state, for the County Borough of Oldham, the number of unfit dwellings planned for demolition during the municipal year 1970–71, the number of municipal replacements scheduled for commencement in the same year and, on that basis, how many years will be required to overcome the remaining backlog of rehousing.
Mr Charles Mapp: Is my hon. Friend aware that 11,000 Oldham householders are now likely to be living in unfit houses, over three times the period that they would have done if a Labour Council continued in office? May I put the specific point to him that regardless of the political complexion the problem of financing the rehousing programme between the stage of clearing the unfit houses and bringing the first...