A Case for Vigilance
A letter in Tuesday's Times from Lord Harmsworth and Sir Lawrence Chubb, on the danger to the future of England's unique common land as a result of the operation of the Requisitioned Land and Works Bill deserves all the prominence which that paper rightly gave it. What the Bill provides is, briefly, that where land has been taken over during the war for military or other public purposes, the Government may, if it desires, instead of restoring the land to its original condition, acquire it compulsorily. In some cases it may, after doing that, sell it in the open market. Such a measure is clearly not drafted without a reason. There may well be cases in which buildings such as hospitals, or camps which would serve well for some educational institution, should be pre- served, the land on which they stand being, therefore, compul-
sorily acquired. Where privately-owned land is concerned the owner may be relied on to stand out for reasonable terms. In the case of common land it is not a question of terms at all, but of resisting further encroachments on a public demesne drastically diminished in the past by the Enclosure Acts. Even here there may be exceptional cases where land can justifiably be retained, but the House of Commons ought to insist on the embodiment in the Bill of the most effective safeguards it is possible to put on paper. One question to which Members should give their attention is the nature of the final tribunal of appeal against a Minister's order in such cases. A War Works Commission appointed by the Treasury is far from being an ideal body. Something more independent of Whitehall would be much preferable.
Previous page
