HC Deb 22 February 1888 vol 322 cc1203-4

Order for Second Reading read.

Dr. CAMERON (Glasgow, College),

in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said, it was one with which the House was familiar. It had been before the House for several Sessions; it had been fully debated and voted on; and on the occasion on which, after full discussion, it was voted on, it received the unanimous support of the Liberal Government then in Office. The object of the Bill was simply to make Parochial Boards in Scotland representative bodies, elected on a franchise exactly similar to that for the election of Municipal Councils, and also to do away with the use of mandates.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Dr Cameron.)

THE CHIEF SECRETARY FOR IRELAND (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR) (Manchester, E.)

said, he thought the House would be fully sensible of the extreme absurdity of discussing in the space of seven minutes (it being now 5.37) a great revolution in the local government of Scotland. But there was further this objection to the Bill, that the Government were pledged and fully proposed to deal in a large spirit with the whole question of the local government of Scotland. Pending the introduction of a measure which he hoped they would bring in at no very distant date, it would be perfectly absurd for the House to attempt to tinker with the question; and for that reason he seriously suggested to the hon. Member that he should reserve his suggestions on this important question until the whole scheme with regard to local government in England and Scotland was before the House and the country. He therefore hoped the hon. Gentleman (Dr. Cameron) would not press his Motion to a Division.

MR. ESSLEMONT (Aberdeen E.)

Might I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is the intention of the Government to bring in a Local Government Bill for Scotland this Session?

MR. A. J. BALFOUR

I cannot conceive that there can possibly be time at the disposal of the House to discuss such an enormous question as the local government of Scotland this Session; but, of course, I cannot say.

Question put.

The House divided:—Ayes 91; Noes 168: Majority 77.—(Div. List, No. 10.)

Forward to