ADJOURNMENT. (Hansard, 4 May 1892)

§ (5.55.) MR. BRYCE (Aberdeen, S.)
I take this opportunity of putting a question to the First Lord of the Treasury which can be answered in a few moments. Before Easter a Resolution was passed by the House, the Government agreeing, setting forth that legislation was needed to provide for public access to mountains and moorlands, especially in Scotland; and upon the acceptance of this Resolution by the Government a Bill was immediately brought in to give effect to it, in exactly the same terms as Bills which had been before the House in two preceding Sessions. My hon. Friend the Member for West Aberdeen (Dr. Farquharson) and myself have repeatedly moved the 139 Second Reading of this Bill after the time for taking Opposed Business, and have always been blocked by an objection from the other side of the House, and sometimes from a Member of the Government. This is a most unsatisfactory position, that the Government should accept a Resolution, and then refuse us any facilities, or even to exercise any influence on their supporters to enable us to bring forward a Bill founded on the Resolution. I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman what is the attitude of the Government towards the Bill; whether they are willing to afford any opportunity for the discussion of the proposals to carry out the spirit of the Resolution; and whether they will state their objections to our proposals, and indicate any form which may be accepted by us, so that the Bill may go through?

§ (5.56.) MR. TOMLINSON (Preston)
As I have several times stopped the Bill, perhaps I may be allowed to say that I have done so because the Bill is not in accordance with the Resolution.

§ MR. BRYCE
My question was not addressed to the hon. Gentleman.

§ (5.57.) THE FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY (Mr. A. J. BALFOUR,) Manchester, E.
I know nothing about the course taken by my hon. Friend, a course which he has every right to take, and which is frequently adopted by hon. Members opposite towards Bills my Friend desires to promote. As to the attitude of the Government towards this particular Bill mentioned, while we undoubtedly did accept the proposition that something should be done to deal with this subject, we have never given assent to this Bill by speech or vote, nor do we think that in its present shape it is a Bill which the House ought to accept. The hon. Gentleman asks me to give the reasons why the Government object to the Bill; but the few minutes now at my disposal will not admit of that, even if this were the opportunity for doing so. I do not think that any Bill on the subject could pass the House without discussion, and time for that discussion we have not to give. If the hon. Gentleman will confer with my right hon. and learned Friend near me (the Lord Advocate), possibly we might come to an understanding as to what kind of Bill would be acceptable.

§ (5.57.) MR. ANGUS SUTHERLAND (Sutherland)
Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the Government are under an obligation to bring forward a proposal of their own if they refuse this Bill? Does the right hon. Gentleman definitely decline to do so?

§ MR. A. J. BALFOUR
I will consider that.

§ (5.58.) MR. MACARTNEY (Antrim, S.)
I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman a question with reference to the business on Friday evening next. Can the right hon. Gentleman give us any information as to whether the Motion which stands on the Order Book in the name of the hon. Member for South Armagh (Mr. Blane) is withdrawn; and, if so, what other business is to be proceeded with?

§ (5.59.) MR. A. J. BALFOUR
I have heard a rumour to that effect; but I have no official knowledge. Of course, it is in the power of hon. Gentlemen to put down Notices of Motion for Fridays, when they will be discussed in their order of precedence.

§ (5.59.) DR. TANNER (Cork Co., Mid)
In reference to the course of business, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he persists in his proposal to make the discussion of the Irish Education Bill contingent upon the passing of the Irish Local Government Bill; and whether he intends to so arrange matters that the smaller Bills shall take precedence, and the important Education Bill be contingent on the passing of these?

§ MR. A. J. BALFOUR
No; the hon. Gentleman is mistaken if he supposes anything of the kind.

§ DR. FARQUHARSON (Aberdeenshire, W.)
I wish to express my strong dissent from the line taken by the Government towards the Access to Mountains Bill after accepting the Resolution. I trust that facilities may be given for the discussion of that Bill, or that the Government will carry out their expressed intention by bringing forward proposals of their own.