HC Deb 05 May 1902 vol 107 cc763-4

Order for Second Reading read.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time"—(Mr. Austen Chamberlain.)

MR. FLYNN (Cork, N.)

said the Government should give some explanation of the provisions of the Bill or put it oft' to a future day. It dealt with sewers, drains, and other matters in regard to which the County Council of London was the governing body, and the House was asked to adopt the Bill without any explanation whatever.

THE FINANCIAL SECRETARY TO THE TREASURY (Mr. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN,) Worcestershire, E.

said the Bill provided for acquiring two sites in London for the purpose of enabling the Post Office to carry on its business. One of these was a site off Oxford Street which was urgently needed in connection with the telephone system. It would be in the recollection of the House that he was asked the other day why extensions were not open to certain districts. It was impossible for the Post Office to make progress with the system until they were able to secure this site. As to the form of the Bill, it was exactly similar to all Bills of this nature, and followed the precedents of former years. So far as he was aware, there was no opposition to the Bill from any quarter which was concerned. He appealed to the House to pass the Second Reading now. The Bill would be sent to a hybrid Committee, and all objections, if there were any, could be heard in the ordinary way. It was really of serious importance to the public service that the Bill should not be delayed.

(11.55.) MR. CALDWELL (Lanarkshire, Mid)

said the Financial Secretary to the Treasury had stated that the Bill followed the lines of all the other Bills of the Post Office. He was surprised to hear that statement, because the Bill did not do so. If it had, he would not have offered any opposition whatever to the Bill. He thought it should have contained a proviso similar to that in previous Acts and with the insertion of which he had himself something to do. In the 1890 Act a proviso was inserted for the protection of the Corporation of London, and, if the Post Office required to break open the streets, they should be obliged in this case to apply for permission to the County Council, just as in the other case they had to apply to the Corporation of London.

MR. AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN

I will put in that clause, but I do not think the Bill requires it.

MR. CALDWELL

said the clauses were specially put in the previous Acts to protect the local authorities.

It being Midnight, the debate stood adjourned.

Debate to be resumed tomorrow.

Adjourned at five minutes after Twelve o'clock.