HC Deb 28 June 1872 vol 212 cc344-6

asked the President of the Local Government Board, If it is the intention of the Government to proceed with the Public Health Bill this Session, and, in that case, if it is proposed to withdraw any of the provisions contained in the Bill?


said, it certainly was the intention of the Government to proceed with the Bill. His hon. Friend and the House were aware that he committed the Bill pro formâ last night, with the view of moving certain Amendments and omitting certain clauses. However unwillingly, he had been obliged to come to the conclusion, considering the advanced period of the Session and the pressure of Public Business, that it had become necessary, in the interest of the Bill itself, to do what was sometimes called "throwing part of the cargo overboard." He had considered what sacrifices it would be requisite to make in order to insure the passing of a measure which it would be worth the while of Parliament to pass. Last year, he might remind the House, they consolidated certain departments under the Local Government Board. Most hon. Members were aware that the Bill upon the Table might be divided into three parts—the first part organizing local sanitary authorities; the second, which was the body of the Bill, giving new powers to those authorities, and imposing new duties upon them; and the third part containing a number of miscellaneous clauses, some important, some merely conferring facilities for procedure upon the local authorities. The best course to take appeared to be this—to rest satisfied for the present with the consolidation and concentration of the local authorities, and to withdraw the clauses with reference to nuisances, hospitals, rivers and other matters, thus making it a Bill for constituting the new sanitary authorities and giving them some facilities.


asked the right hon. Gentleman, whether he could name a day for bringing on the Bill?


said, it was impossible at this moment to name a day until the Mines Bill had been disposed of.


asked, whether any determination had been come to as to the expenses in connection with the Bill?


asked, whether, when the Mines Bill had been disposed of, precedence would be given to the Public Health Bill in preference to the Licensing Bill?


said, the Government were not yet in a position to fix a day for bringing on the Bill, but would take the earliest opportunity of giving the best possible notice. On the Motion that the Speaker do leave the Chair he would give the best explanation in his power with reference to the question asked by the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Barttelot.)


, said, he must ask the Prime Minister himself to inform the House whether it had been decided that the Public Health Bill should have priority over the Licensing question?


asked the right hon. Gentleman, Whether, bearing in mind the period of the Session, he would not take care that the Corrupt Practices Bill should follow the Mines Bill?


said, he was sure the House would smypathize with the Government in the difficulties in which they stood in meeting the relative and rival expectations and demands, all of them very reasonable, of various hon. Members. The desire of the Government was, as had been shown in the remarks of his right hon. Friend (Mr. Stansfeld), to place before the House such a portion of the essential legislation of the Session as could be disposed of in a reasonable time, and not to let Bills accumulate on the Paper to a late period, and then be obliged to withdraw them. It was with that desire that the Government looked forward to be able to deal with the three subjects referred to in a manner and within a period that would insure the effective attention of the House, without drawing unduly on its strength and patience. He hoped that for the moment hon. Gentlemen would be satisfied with that answer, and would leave the Government to see what could be done.