-
15
WEDNESDAY, JULY 9, 1980
AS A RESULT, THE FOLLOWING AMENDMENTS WERE MADE AT THE COMMITTEE STAGE:
*
*
IN RESPECT OF THE DEFINITION OF +ELECTRICITY NETWORK+ IN CLAUSE 2, TO MAKE IT QUITE CLEAR THAT THE BILL DOES NOT COVER EXISTING TRANSMISSION LINES. THIS IS TO AVOID ANY POSSIBILITY OF A POWER COMPANY SEEKING THE CREATION OF A STATUTORY EASEMENT TO OVERRIDE AGREEMENTS WHICH IT MIGHT HAVE REACHED WITH INDIVIDUAL LANDOWNERS REGARDING THE CONDITIONS FOR THE USE OF LAND FOR SUPPORTING STRUCTURES AND/OR THE OVERSAILING OF LAND-
IN RESPECT OF CLAUSE 4(1), TO PUT IT BEYOND DOUBT THAT THE POWER COMPANIES WILL NOT BE ABLE TO USE THE PROCEDURES FOR STATUTORY EASEMENT INSTEAD OF RESUMPTION AS A MEANS OF ACQUIRING LAND FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTION OF PYLONS, AND
IN RESPECT OF CLAUSE 11, TO ENLARGE THE SCOPE OF CLAIM TO INCLUDE ANY LOSSES ARISING FROM THE PREVENTION OF USE OF LAND FOR PROFITABLE GAINS AS A RESULT OF THE STERILISATION OF ANY LAND DURING THE PERIOD WHEN TEMPORARY WORKS ARE BEING CARRIED OUT BY A POWER COMPANY.
HE SAID, MR YEUNG HAS ALSO RAISED THE QUESTION OF THE PENALTY PROVIDED IN THE BILL.
THIS IS INTENDED TO DEAL WITH A SITUATION WHERE A LANDOWNER DECIDES TO OBSTRUCT A POWER COMPANY CARRYING OUT WORKS BY CREATING SOME OBSTRUCTION ON HIS OWN LAND.
+IF SUCH A SITUATION EVER DID ARISE, THERE COULD CONCEIVABLY BE SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES FOR THE CONTINUED MAINTENANCE OF ELECTRICITY SUPPLY. IT IS THEREFORE CONSIDERED THAT PROVISION MUST BE MADE FOR THIS EVENTUALITY, GIVEN THAT THE OBSTRUCTION IN QUESTION WOULD BE ON THE LANDOWNER'S OWN LAND, HE SAID,
THE PROVISION WAS NECESSARY AS IT REFLECTED THE PUBLIC+ NATURE OF THE EASEMENTS IN QUESTION AND WOULD BE A PROTECTION OF THE WIDER PUBLIC INTEREST.
+HOPEFULLY THERE WILL BE NO OCCASION TO USE THIS PROVISION BUT WITHOUT IT THE PUBLIC INTEREST COULD NOT BE FULLY ASSURED, HE ADDED.
/16
4