HC Deb 30 June 1909 vol 7 cc365-6

(on behalf of The Chairman of Ways and Means) moved, "That, in the case of the Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 9) Bill, Standing Order 193A be suspended, and that the Bill be now read the first time."


Are we to have no explanation of the reasons for this proposal?


I agree that the hon. Member has every right to demand an explanation. This no doubt is a not unusual course, but it is one we desire to avoid as far as possible. There are three Provisional Orders concerned in this, and in each there is a case of urgency, and there is an entirely satisfactory explanation for the delays. The first case is that of the Hitchin Order dealing with the breaking up of the hospital district, and with the transfer and disposal of the hospital site purchased by the Joint Board. There is no objection to it; it is at the desire of the district and of the Hertfordshire County Council. It is urgent because should infectious disease break out the situation, without an isolation hospital, might be serious. The reason for the delay which occurred is almost absurd; it has been due to a mistake in the printer's office of one of the local papers by which there was a failure to insert the statutory advertisement. The second case is that of the Maryport Order which deals with the water supply. That is urgent because the water supply, as it at present exists, has been condemned by the Local Government Board Inspector, and there would be very considerable responsibility in the event of disease breaking out. The inspector reports that the imperfections and shortage of the supply are due to the inefficiency of certain apparatus, and that it is therefore necessary to proceed at once with the changes. The reason for the delay in this case is that the Local Government Board found it necessary to consult the Law Officers of the Crown as to their powers in regard to Provisional Orders of this description and after the legal opinion had been obtained and the local inquiry had been held there was not time to bring the Order forward in the ordinary way. The third case is a joint Sewerage Order for Whaley Bridge District. In this case a local inquiry was held, it was found that there were imperfections in the sewerage, as originally it was only proposed to include certain parts of the district in the sewerage scheme. Since then, as a result of the local inquiry, there has been a readjustment of the district which necessitated a further advertisement.

Motion put, and agreed to.

Bill read the first time.