HL Deb 28 March 1867 vol 186 cc704-5
LORD TAUNTON

wished to know, How it happened that the Board of Trade had discontinued their Reports upon any Private Bills except Bills on tidal waters and harbours? There was a class of Bills, such as those relating to the Liverpool and Birkenhead Docks, which were quite as important as Bills on tidal waters; and he thought it would be well that the Board of Trade should continue to exercise a general superintendence in reporting upon Bills of this character. Such a change should not have been made without a special Report by the Board of Trade. With all respect to the Chairman of Committees of their Lordships' House, and the Chairman of Ways and Means of the other House of Parliament, he could not help thinking that matters of this importance should be watched over by a responsible Minister of the Crown, and not merely by officers of the two Houses. He wished to know what reasons had induced the Board of Trade to discontinue the Reports—because, though they had no doubt involved a great deal of trouble, this was not a sufficient reason for the alteration.

THE DUKE OF RICHMOND

said, the Chairman of Committees in that House was communicated with before the alteration was made, and on the 15th instant the Vice President of the Board of Trade explained the reasons for it to the other House. Mr. Cave stated that the preparation of the Reports involved considerable labour and expense, that they were usually consigned to the waste paper basket, and that in future only Bills affecting tidal harbours and rivers would be reported on. The House of Commons sanctioned the alteration, and Colonel Wilson Patten privately expressed to Mr. Cave his entire concurrence in it. Of late years the Reports had been confined to noticing small matters of detail, in which the ordinary rules and practice of the Legislature were transgressed; but these underwent investigation elsewhere. The Reports on tidal harbour Bills were presented in pursuance of an Act of Parliament, and were therefore under a different category from other Bills, and would therefore be continued. The Board had reported on the Liverpool case at the instance of the noble Lord (Lord Taunton), as Chairman of the Committee, and in any special matter they would undertake to do so.

LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEY

thought their Lordships' consent ought to have been asked to the change; mid expressed a hope that the Reports would be continued, since they contained much valuable information; and unusual proposals affecting harbours might otherwise, if unopposed in Committee, escape attention.

LORD REDESDALE

said, that he entered into communication with the President of the Board of Trade about a month before the meeting of Parliament on the subject of these Reports, stating that in his opinion the Reports with regard to metropolitan railways, to the grouping of railways, and to tidal harbours, ought to be continued; but that anything more useless than the general Reports could not well be conceived.

LORD TAUNTON

admitted that there might be good reasons for abandoning the Reports on Railway Bills; but he hoped that those on schemes which affected the general interests of trade would be continued.