HC Deb 12 July 1887 vol 317 cc589-90

Order for Second Reading read.

THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. H. A. MACDONALD) (Edinburgh and St. Andrew's Universities)

, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said: This Bill is for a very simple purpose. Before the year 1877, there wore a large number of local prisons in Scotland under separate management in different counties, and when these prisons were abolished, arrangements were made for the superannuation of the officers. It has been found highly inconvenient, where two or more Local Authorities have had to pay a share of the pensions of these officers, that the amounts should be annually collected separately. The object, and the one object of this Bill, is to enable the authorities to commute the amounts of the annual payments they require to make. I think I need say no more in recommending this Bill to the House.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Mr. J. E. A. Macdonald.)

MR. T. M. HEALY (Longford, N.)

The position of Scotland in the matter of the superannuation of prison officers is somewhat remarkable, and I wish to know why an exceptional position is taken up as to that country, and why, when a Bill is pending for Ireland, Her Majesty's Government, in that measure, should propose to deal with the subject in an entirely different way? I do not say that the Government are not dealing with this Scotch question in an admirable manner; but I complain that so far as Ireland is concerned, the Government propose to abolish the Richmond Prison without consulting the Dublin Corporation, and to throw upon them the whole burden of the charge. Of course it would be irrelevant, and I do not intend to discuss the Irish Question; but I think it is a remarkable thing that this Bill has been brought in to deal with the Scotch question in such a very different manner from the way it is proposed to deal with the Irish Question. As I understand it, the proposal affecting Ireland is that an entire block of buildings shall be done away with, and that the Dublin Corporation shall pay the expenses of commuting the superannuation allowances and other expenses, without any consideration being given to this Local Authority. The proposal in the present Bill seems to me to be of an entirely different character. It seems to show that, in dealing with a Scotch question, the Government are willing to give the Local Authorities some consideration. I think that is a proper thing to do. We have asked for that in our case, but have never got it, nor have the Government ever said that they will consult the Local Authorities before doing away with the block of buildings I have referred to.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill read a second time, and committed for Monday next.