HC Deb 24 March 1898 vol 55 cc745-6
MR. D. KILBRIDE (Galway, N.)

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, with reference to the extended area of the Belfast City boundary, whether he is aware that the principal city official, in giving evidence before the Select Committee on the Belfast Corporation Bill of 1896, testified that the Corporation would not require the footpaths in the extended area to be flagged; whether he is aware that, notwithstanding this representation, the Belfast Corporation have instructed their City Surveyor to insist upon the flagging of the footpaths in the outside area in the same manner as the footpaths within the old city boundary; and whether, considering that two Belfast City Bills are at present before Parliament, he will make inquiry into the matter for the information of the Members of the House?


The Belfast City Surveyor (not the principal city official, who is the Town Clerk), in giving his evidence before the Select Committee with respect to the then existing streets and roads in the added area, which were not repairable by the Grand Juries, stated that he did not think the Corporation would require flagging to be done in the outside area. The Town Clerk of Belfast states that the Corporation have not, nor are they, requiring the flagging to be done in those cases. He adds that paragraphs 2 and 3 of Section 11 were introduced into the Belfast Act of 1896 to carry out this understanding. It appears from the Town Clerk's Report that new streets have been laid out in the added area since the passing of the Act, and in such cases the Corporation have required the footways to be flagged before they would adopt them. They are fully justified, he states, in doing so, and all the owners of property adjoining, with one solitary exception, have willingly agreed to this requirement. The only Bill the Corporation have at present before Parliament is, I understand, the Belfast Corporation (Hospitals) Bill.