LOCAL GOVERNMENT (TRANSFER OF POWERS) BILL. (Hansard, 25 March 1903)

§ MR. CALDWELL (Lanarkshire, Mid)
said the object of this Bill was to transfer certain important powers from the Local Government Board to the County Councils. This matter was one that was raised in the Local Government Bill of 1888. The transfer of these powers was inserted in that Bill, but was afterwards withdrawn, and the matter was left to the Local Government Board, who might apply for a transfer of the powers to the Local Authorities. In 1889 the Local Government Board made a provisional order under the Act of 1888 for the transfer to the County Councils of certain powers; and a confirming Bill was introduced and referred to a Select Committee of this House. That Bill received considerable opposition from the non-county boroughs, and the result was that it was withdrawn. That was the position in 1889, but the matter did not end there. In 1897 an attempt was made by the County Council of Yorkshire to obtain a transfer of powers and again an enquiry was held, with the result that for the third time these powers were refused, and the Bill was again withdrawn. The objections of the non-county boroughs were that they would be put under the authority of County Councils, an authority which they recognised was no more in dependent or important in its own sphere than were the non-county borough councils themselves; that questions of difference would arise between the urban and rural elements of the counties and that the tribunal to decide those questions should be the Local Government Board, and not the County Councils on account of the conflicting interests with which they would have to deal. The County Councils did not want these powers. They had lately had new powers imposed upon them by the Education Act, and were already overburdened with their increased duties, and now it was proposed to transfer to them duties, not of an administrative, but a judicial character. Those were the objections which the non-county boroughs had to the Bill. They objected to being placed under the authority of the County Councils in matters seriously affecting their interests. He had no objection to the Bill itself because it was an English Bill, and he had no concern in it. He had only intervened because the parliamentary agents of the non-county boroughs had placed the position before him, and he 244 thought under the circumstances it should not be read a second time without a discussion being raised upon it.

§ SIR FRANCIS POWELL (Wigan)
said he could not help feeling that the non-county boroughs were quite able to fight their own battles. He had been largely concerned with local government, and he was of opinion that there were no more powerful bodies in this country than the non-county boroughs. He had no doubt that when this Bill was read a second time and sent to a Committee, the non-county boroughs would be found quite competent to fight their own battle and allocate their own course. He was glad to see this Bill which he thought had been too long delayed.

§ MR. BRIGG (Yorkshire, W. R., Keighley)
said that the County Councils were of opinion that it would be a most desirable thing if these powers were delegated to them. There had been objections raised to these proposals on former occasions, but when he had examined the statements of those who objected he had never been able to find any real ground for opposing the passage of the Bill. He therefore had great pleasure in supporting the second reading.

MR. LLOYD-GEOEGE (Carnarvon Boroughs)
was glad the hon. Member for Mid Lanark did not intend to press his objections further. There was general agreement on both sides of the House with regard to the matter, and speaking for the Welsh councils he could say there was a keen desire that the Bill should be carried through. The opposition of certain districts in England a few years ago had the effect of preventing the Local Government Board putting something of the same sort into operation then, and doubtless in some counties the same difficulty still existed. But there were large tracts of country, especially in Wales, where the non-county boroughs did not object to this proposal, and as the Bill proposed to give the Local Government Board power to deal with certain counties in which that difficulty did not arise, he hoped it would go through.

§ THE PRESIDENT OF THE LOCAL GOVEENMENT BOARD (Mr. WALTER LONG,) Bristol, S.
said the re- 245 marks which had been made were doubtless correct so far as the past history of the Bill was concerned, but it had been overlooked that the present Bill sought only to enable the Local Government Board to do with regard to one county or a set of counties what hitherto they could do only with regard to the country as a whole. Action would be taken by means of Provisional Order, so that the position of the non-county boroughs would be in no way damnified by the Bill.

§ SIR ALBERT ROLLIT (Islington, S.)
pointed out that the Bill perpetuated the distinction between county and non-county boroughs which in practice had often worked badly and created much friction. Although the Bill only gave power to deal with a particular county, it should be borne in mind that this might be a dangerous method of proceeding if the general principle was objected to. It might be comparatively easy to take such a step in a particular instance without provoking much opposition, whereas if the step were proposed to be taken generally the non-county boroughs would be able to combine, and thus be better able to resist changes to which they might object. The Bill was at present under the consideration of the Municipal Corporations Association, and when the measure next came before the House Amendments would probably be moved. In the meantime he was not disposed, if he were able to do so, to resist the progress of the Bill, but it seemed to be a tactical movement, calculated to carry out seriatim what might be regarded as objectionable.