LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ENGLAND AND WALES) ELECTORS BILL. (Hansard, 20 April 1888)

§ MR. ILLINGWORTH (Bradford, W.)
said, he would make an appeal to the Government to allow some time for the consideration of this Bill, which dealt with a most important matter in relation to the scheme of Local Government, and he ventured to think that time given for a discussion of the Bill and to elicit information would tend to the ultimate progress of the Bill. It proposed to set up a new register for the counties, and there were several hon. Members who desired to know whether it would not be 127 possible to take the existing register rather than set up a new annual charge. At any rate, seeing that it was nearly 12 o'clock, there was no opportunity for discussion, and it would be altogether unusual for the Government to expect that the House would be satisfied to pass the second reading without discussion. He appealed to the First Lord of the Treasury to postpone the second reading, and he believed the House would approve the suggestion made in all good faith.

§ THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. W. H. SMITH) (Strand, Westminster)
said, he thought it was understood that the discussion on the Bill which had just been read a second time included that Bill: It admittedly travelled over the ground this Bill occupied. The two measures were practically one in object; but it was necessary to divide them, because this second Bill must be passed before the first, inasmuch as the register would have to be prepared, if the County Councils were to come into operation in the early part of next year. Under the circumstances, and seeing that the remarks of hon. Members in reference to the cost of the register and on any other points were such as could more conveniently be discussed in Committee, he trusted the House would now consent to give the Bill a second reading. It could not be taken next week, as Government time had been apportioned for other Business with which it was necessary to make progress. There would be great delay and difficulty in giving effect to the constitution of the County Councils, unless ample time were given to complete arrangements for bringing the Local Government Bill into operation.

§ MR. WHITBREAD (Bedford)
asked how the House would be placed should there be a desire in Committee to make grave alterations, vital changes, in the first Bill which would affect the principle of the Electors Bill? If the House passed the second reading of the latter Bill, it would not be able or might not be able to deal with clauses in the principal Bill which affected registration, and might involve the reconstruction of the whole Electors Bill. It would be highly inconvenient, to say the least, to be told, when the clauses of the main Bill came to be considered, that alterations could not be made affecting the 128 principle of the Electors Bill which had already been agreed to. He would ask, would there be left to hon. Members absolutely free hands if they agreed to this second reading? Would they in the least degree be binding themselves as to their action in Committee on the main Bill in relation to clauses dealing with electors? If free action were not prejudiced, he should not object to the second reading, but he thought the debate just closed had shown that though no Amendment was moved, time was not wasted and the ground was considerably cleared. The question of registration, however, had been passed over. He and others were anxious to express opinions on the subject to which it was not desirable now to refer. He desired not to prejudice free discussion of one Bill by the fact of having agreed in principle to another Bill,

§ THE PRESIDENT or THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. RITCHIE) (Tower Hamlets, St. George's)
said, it would be perfectly evident that it would be quite impossible to bring the main Bill into operation unless the Registration Bill were passed, and it was also evident that if the main Bill was to be brought into operation at the time they hoped and anticipated next January, no time must be lost in passing this Bill so that the register could be made up in time for the elections to the Councils to take place. All that the House was asked to assent to now by the second reading was that there shall be a register forthcoming of the electors under the main Bill. No one would be debarred from debating the details of that register in Committee by having assented to the second reading, nor would any one be prejudiced in reference to the main Bill. Unless, without delay, the House agreed to read the Bill a second time, there would not be time to make up the register for the main Bill to come into operation, but there was no desire on the part of the Government to restrain full discussion so far as the register was concerned. He might add that it was quite understood that the discussion just closed covered the ground occupied by both Bills.

§ SIR. WILLIAM HARCOURT (Derby)
said, he was quite sure there was no desire to obstruct the progress of the Bill or either of the Bills; but the right hon. Gentleman must see that he could not 129 go on with the Registration Bill, and make it operative upon. the main Bill, until it had been settled what the franchise was to be. Thus the main Bill affected the Registration Bill. He had no strong feeling himself on the subject; but if any number of hon. Members desired to make observations on the subject, it might be well for the Government to pay some deference to the wish.

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
said, it was just on that point he made his appeal to hon. Members to reserve their observations until Committee. This was a Bill of machinery only, and to avoid considerable delay, it was necessary now to take the second reading. Next week, as he had explained, would be occupied with other business.

§ SIR WALTER FOSTER (Derby, Ilkeston)
suggested that many Members on that side were anxious to go into the matter very carefully; but if they passed the Bill now, they passed a Bill to which many hon. Members had given little or no attention. They had given their time to the consideration of the larger measure, and they had made the discussion as brief as possible, making no great demand on the patience of the Government. He thought the Government might be fairly asked to extend to hon. Members a little time for the consideration of the Register upon which the Councils would be elected. Surely, if it were necessary, provision might be made for making the registration a little later than ordinary, as when the last Reform Act was passed. This was a great measure of reform for County Government, and he did not think the question of registration should be hurried over at this pace.

§ MR. RITCHIE
said, by the indulgence of the House he might be allowed to assure hon. Members that after very careful consideration and discussion with the Parliamentary draftsman, as to the time required for preparation, he arrived at the conclusion that unless the House proceeded with great rapidity with the Registration Bill, it would be quite impossible to get the register made up in time for the elections.

§ MR. CHAPLIN (Lincolnshire, Sleaford)
asked, when it was proposed to go into Committee on the second Bill?

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
said, he proposed the House should go into Committee 130 before taking the same stage of the Bill just road a second time.

§ MR. JAMES STUART (Shoreditch, Hoxton)
said, surely there would be no opportunity of putting the Registration Bill in force until the first Bill was through both Houses, and there was nothing unreasonable in the request for more time.

§ MR. RITCHIE
explained that the Bill had been drawn separately with the view that by the time the other Bill passed, the register might be made up in preparation for the elections to take place in January. This would be impossible, unless the Bill were proceeded with and passed long before the other Bill was through.

§ MR. ILLINGWORTH ,
asking the indulgence of the House, said, there were certain views on that side as to the possibility of proceeding on the existing register, but when the House was in Committee, and such a change was proposed, then the Government might say it was too late to make the alteration. On some day next week surely two or three hours might be allowed before the Budget Bill was passed; that time would probably be sufficient for the purpose. It was impossible for the House to pass without consideration the second reading of a Bill of this magnitude, throwing on the rates an expenditure of £1,500 a year on a new register. In the interest of the ratepayers, which was the supreme concern of the Government, he pleaded for more time.

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
said, he could only repeat that the Bill merely provided the machinery by which the whole scheme could be brought into operation. The Committee stage offered every opportunity for such suggestions as the hon. Member referred to, and the Government would give them every consideration then.

§ MR. J. ROWLANDS (Finsbury, E.)
said, he had had some experience of registration, its expense and importance, and it was imperative that some time should be devoted to discussion, even though some of the Business appointed for next week were postponed.

§ MR. BIGGAR (Cavan, W.)
said, he had had some personal experience in reference to registration, and the expense entailed.

§ MR. W. H. SMITH
rose in his place, and claimed to move "That the Question be now put."