HC Deb 17 March 1892 vol 2 cc1037-9

Motion made, and Question proposed, That Standing Orders 150 and 173A be applicable to all Bills referred to the Committee on Police and Sanitary Regulations; and that it be an Instruction to the Com- mittee in their Report under such Standing Orders to state their reasons for granting any powers in conflict with, deviation from, or excess of the general Law."—(Mr. Stuart-Wortley.)

Amendment proposed, After the word "Law," insert the words "and the text of the Clauses by which such powers are proposed to be conferred."—(Mr. H. H. Fowler.)

Amendment agreed to.

Motion made, and Question proposed, That it be an Instruction to the Committee not to sanction in any Bill referred to them any Clauses relating to matters which are the subject of provisions in 'The Infectious Disease Notification Act, 1889,' 'The Public Health Acts Amendment Act, 1890,' 'The Infectious Disease (Prevention) Act, 1890,' or 'The Museums and Gymnasiums Act, 1891.' That in the case of Bills reported from the Committee on Police and Sanitary Regulations, Three clear days shall intervene between the date when the Report of the Committee is circulated with the Votes and the consideration of the Bill."—(Mr. Stuart Wortley.)

Amendment proposed, To insert after "1891," the words "unless the Committee report that the insertion of such Clauses ought to be allowed, with the Reasons on which their opinion is founded."—(Sir Lyon Playfair.)

DR. FARQUHARSON (Aberdeenshire, W.)

I do not want to raise any formal objection to the Instruction, for I think the Amendment moved by my right hon. Friend fairly meets the case; but my own opinion is that much wider discretionary powers should be given to a Committee of this nature. Of course, it is impossible to have finality in regard to the subjects that come under their view. We often find that in practice an Act works badly, and the wants and requirements of localities finding expression in clauses in Private Bills often useful suggestions for legislation. So we find that many of these Bills are made up of clauses passed by various Committees for Local Acts. With the Amendment of my right hon. Friend, I think the Instruction will work well enough.

MR. LAWSON (St. Pancras, W.)

I quite agree with my hon. Friend, and I think the experience of Members on Private Bill Committees will confirm what he has said. But I merely want to ask how far this Standing Order, as amended, will affect the position of London, where special circumstances have been recognised as rendering special provisions necessary?

THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. RITCHIE,) Tower Hamlets, St. George's.

I think the Amendment of my right hon. Friend entirely meets the case. The House will agree, I think, that there should be some direct responsibility placed upon the Committee, and this is practically all that is done by the Instruction as amended.

Amendment agreed to.

Main Question, as amended, put, and agreed to. Ordered, That it be an Instruction to the Committee not to sanction in any Bill referred to them any Clauses relating to matters which are the subject of provisions in "The Infectious Disease Notification Act, 1889," "The Public Health Acts Amendment Act, 1890," "The Infectious Disease (Prevention) Act, 1890," or "The Museums and Gymnasiums Act, 1891," unless the Committee report that the insertion of such Clauses ought to be allowed, with the Reasons on which their opinion is founded. Ordered, That in the case of Bills reported from the Committee on Police and Sanitary Regulations, three clear days shall intervene between the date when the Report of the Committee is circulated with the Votes and the consideration of the Bill.—(Mr. Stuart-Wortley.)

Forward to