HC Deb 17 December 1888 vol 332 cc441-2
SIR LYON PLAYFAIR (Leeds, S.)

asked the President of the Local Government Board, in relation to the sanitary condition of Cradley, Whether, as the 299th clause of "The Public Health Act, 1875," uses the word "complaint" without limitation to ratepayers, he could revert to the old practice under the Local Government Branch of the Homo Office, which acted upon the complaint of a Government Medical Inspector; and, whether, if the President of the Local Government Board has lost this initiative by disuse, it is competent for him to proceed by a writ of mandamus to enforce statutory obligations for securing the health of communities when it is endangered by the ignorance or apathy of Local Authorities?

THE PRESIDENT (Mr. RITCHIE) (Tower Hamlets, St. George's)

Whatever may have been the practice of the Local Government Act Department prior to the constitution of the Local Government Board in 1871, the view which the Local Government Board have always adopted has been that Section 299 of the Public Health Act contemplates that the complaint therein referred to shall be from some external and independent source, and that a Report of one of the Inspectors of the Board is not such a "complaint" as is contemplated by that section. That view appears to me to be the right one; and I am not prepared to direct that the practice of the Department in this respect shall be altered. The section provides that where complaint is made that a Sanitary Authority have made default in providing their district with sufficient sewers, &c., the Board, if satisfied, after due inquiry, that the Authority have been guilty of the alleged default, may make an Order limiting a time for the performance of their duty; and that, if the duty is not performed within the time limited in the Order, the Order may be enforced by writ of mandamus. There have been instances in which Authorities have failed to comply with Orders under the section; and in those cases the Board have obtained a mandamus to enforce the Order. But, looking to the terms of the section referred to, I doubt whether an application for a mandamus would be successful if the proceedings prescribed by the Act had not previously been taken; and I should not be prepared, in any case, to direct an application to the High Court where the preliminary conditions which the Statute prescribes had not been fulfilled.