§ MR. SYNANsaid, that the Government had declared that they would transfer to another part of the Bill, with 805 which it was more properly consistent, the Proviso giving power to the Privy Council to prohibit the holding of fairs and markets. He should like the Secretary to the Treasury to explain to the Committee the manner in which he proposed to set the matter right. It was right that the Privy Council should have the power to prohibit the holding of fairs and markets in any particular area. The Privy Council would be much better able to decide on the circumstances of each particular case than the House could do by any general rules. In some cases it would be advisable to stop fairs and markets, and in others not. Under these circumstances, he begged to withdraw the Amendment of which he had given Notice.
§ SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONwished to say a few words to the Committee with regard to these Schedules. The intention was to give the Privy Council power to declare an area, which was the word used, instead of a district, and had taken the place of a district in the Bill— the Privy Council was to have power to determine whether fairs and markets in an area should be closed by reason of the amount of disease existing therein. It was quite possible that the Privy Council might deem it necessary to prohibit the holding of fairs and markets in an area, although the disease might not be so prevalent in the larger district as it was in some smaller district contained in it. Although he believed the Bill was perfectly explicit, yet it was possible that the local authorities and magistrates might find some conflict between the words of the Schedule and the governing words of Clause 18. He was instructed, by those who had prepared the Bill, that it would be better to amend Clause 18, and the other clauses dealing with foot - and - mouth disease, which was to be brought up on Report, so that it might be distinctly shown on the face of the clauses that when an area was described as infected the Privy Council had power to close fairs and markets therein and prevent an exhibition of animals in that district. What he proposed to do was to omit both Schedules 3 and 4, and that part of the 5th Schedule dealing with fairs and markets, and to insert the provisions in Clauses 18 and 22 when brought up on Report. The words would run to this effect— 806
The Privy Council, on making any Order declaring any area affected with pleuro-pneumonia or extending the limits thereof, shall consider whether it is necessary or expedient to prohibit the holding in that area of any fairs or markets for the sale of any animal, and shall either prohibit the holding of such fairs and markets or permit them to be held on any condition it may think fit.That clause would make it clear that the prohibition rested with the Privy Council, and would do away with any uncertainty, from the conflict of words in the 18th clause and the Schedule, whether the prohibition rested with the Privy Council or the local authority. At the same time, it would have the effect of causing an area in which fairs and markets had been stopped to be published. The Committee would, therefore, see that the clause would effect the objects in view, and give the Privy Council power to deal with the markets and fairs in an area as necessity might arise.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERwould suggest that the Schedule should not be struck out until the new clause was inserted in the Bill. If the alteration were made, then the Bill would be left without any regulations at all as to fairs and markets, and so it would remain unless the addition to the 18th clause were made. There could be no objection to leaving the Schedule as it stood, to be struck out, if necessary, on Report.
§ SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, he proposed to strike out Schedules 3 and 4, and to move the insertion of a new Schedule, embodying the Amendments he had mentioned at the end.
§ MR. W. E. FORSTERinquired whether he rightly understood the hon. Gentleman to mean that he intended to strike out Schedule 4, and to bring up a new Schedule?
§ Schedules 3 and 4 struck out.