BIRMINGHAM CITY BOUNDARIES. (Hansard, 22 June 1910)

§ The CHAIRMAN of WAYS and MEANS (Mr. Emmott)
I beg to move, "That, in the case of the Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 14) Bill, Standing Order 193A be suspended, and that the Bill be read the first time."
I think this is not the occasion on which the merits of the Bill ought to be discussed at all, nor indeed could they be adequately discussed under our Rules of Order. I am not concerned with the merits. The case I have to make out is that there is a reason for suspending Standing Order 193 (a) in regard to this 435 particular Provisional Order. The questions I have to ask myself in regard to Provisional Orders of this kind are three. The first is. Has the Local Government Board been dilatory in its action to such an extent that they are not justified in asking for a suspension of this Standing-Order? I will relate the facts very shortly. The representation for the making of an Order was received by the Local Government Board from the town council on 26th October, 1909. The various local authorities were informed on 9th November that the local inquiry had been fixed to commence on 14th December, and their observations on the matter were invited. The Inquiry began on 14th December, and was adjourned on the 23rd until the 29th, and was com pleted on 14th January. The Inquiry lasted twenty-three days. The Inquiry was so exhaustive that the transcript of the shorthand notes of the evidence ran to over 2,000 pages of printed matter. And the Inspector's Report exceeded over 300 typed pages, and was received by the Board on 26th February. The proposals submitted by the Town Council of Birmingham involved (1) the addition to Birmingham of the whole of one borough, two urban districts, and a rural district, and the greater part of a third urban district; (2) the abolition of three Poor Law unions and one rural district in addition to the rural district included in the city, the constitution of a new Birmingham Union, and the transfer of various parishes from one Union and rural district to another. No less than eight Poor Law unions and four rural districts were affected by the proposals.
The Local Government Board had to consider the local legislation in force throughout the whole of that district, and, owing to the the number and complexity of the questions to be decided it was not until the end of March it was in a position to arrive at a decision. The preparation of the draft Order necessarily occupied a considerable time, and was not completed until 24th May. On 26th May drafts of the proposed Order were sent for observations to fifty-eight local authorities and other bodies, and the Government Departments affected. Remarks and suggestions were received up to 8th June from a large number of the authorities, and were carefully considered. Directions to issue the Order were given on 10th June, and the Order was made and executed on 13th June. I 436 have given these particulars because I think they show in a case of this extraordinary magnitude, there was no undue delay on the part of the Local Government Board. The second question I have to ask myself is, Are there reasons for deciding the case this year? I think there are, because in a case of this magnitude it is desirable that the decision of Parliament upon a case affecting, as it must do, so many interests should be obtained as soon as possible. Moreover, until that decision is given a number of schemes in connection with sanitary and poor law administration in the areas affected must remain in abeyance. The third question I have to ask myself is, whether it is unfair to the local authorities affected that they should be asked to come in with their cases this year? I think that cannot be argued because their case has already been heard. They know what they have to meet, and no considerable time can be asked by them for the purpose of preparing the case that they have to lay before Parliament.
The only other point I need mention, I think, is the question that may arise in the minds of some hon. Members as to whether there is really time this Session to deal with a case of this magnitude. I am not in the secrets of the Government. I do not know how long the Session is going to last, but in previous Sessions, of which I have had experience the earliest concluded on 28th August and the latest on 21st December. Hoping, as I do, that a happier fate is in store for us this year, I may point out to the House that there are precedents with regard to a Bill of this kind for continuing the Bill at whatever stage it reaches when the Session concludes without throwing away all the work that has been done in this Session. That is a plan which could be adopted if the House so desires, supposing it is still in this House. If it happens to be in another place, there are precedents also in the House of Lords for continuing a Bill at whatever stage it has reached, and in which case the consent of this House would be asked. That being the case as put before me, I think I am justified in asking for the suspension of the Order in this instance. We cannot go into the merits satisfactorily to-night, and the real discussion on the merits must take place on the Second Reading. I know that there are points of great importance to be brought up then. On those points I have not a single word to say, and in all probability I shall not have when the Bill comes under discussion. I do not discuss the merits at all to-night. I simply confine 437 myself to stating the case put before me, and I ask the House to pass the Motion suspending the Standing Order.

§ Mr. STAVELEY-HILL
As we have just been informed it would be useless and out of order to discuss the merits of this Bill to-night, but it must not be taken by those who are supporters of this Bill that our acquiescence to-night in any way shows that we are not going to oppose to the utmost of our power on Second Heading. The reason why I rise to-night is in objection to the suspension of this Standing Order. I cannot help but think that the Standing Orders were framed with a due and sensible regard as to how they would affect public and private business, and the Standing Order, which deals entirely with the time when Provisional Order Bills can be introduced into this House was framed in order that those particular Bills could not be introduced after that time, namely, after Whitsuntide. If this was a Bill which arose out of the desire of certain boroughs to enlarge their population with a desire to become county boroughs I should still have the objection, but I do not think that the objection would be so well founded as it is in the case of a very large city with a very large population endeavouring to increase its boundary into three counties. There is another reason why I oppose the suspension of the Standing Order. There are on the Notice Paper, both in this House and in another place, Motions dealing with the whole of the large and vexed question of the readjustment of the rateable question as between towns and counties. Those Motions will affect this Question. Those who are desirous of pushing forward this Bill will cause a good deal of expense and trouble, and if those Motions come on for discussion, the probabilities are (hat we shall not be able to discuss further the merits of this Bill. I say nothing as to the Bill itself. We shall urge our objection to it on the Second Reading in the strongest way Parliamentary usage permits; for the moment I only lodge a protest against the suspension of the Standing Order for the purpose of dealing with so large a Bill as this without the probability of its being brought to a definite conclusion.

Mr. J. W. WILSON (Worcestershire, N.)
I wish to emphasise what has just been said as to the importance of this Bill. The remarks of the Chairman of Ways and Means have shown how very extended a proposal this is. Apparently the only 438 justification in the mind of the right hon. Gentleman for asking the parties concerned in this Bill to commence the expensive litigation which will inevitably follow in the Committee room upstairs is that there are precedents for carrying over, so that the expense and trouble incurred in one Session may not be thrown away. The natural corollary to that statement is that a guarantee should be given by the Government that they will afford facilities for carrying over if at the end of the Session the proceedings on the Bill are not concluded. I think that is a reasonable request. I quite appreciate the desire of the President of the Local Government Board that, after the very extended inquiry which has been made the House should allow the Bill to be read a first time, so that it may be printed and circulated. I think, however, before we agree to the suspension of the Standing Order, we are entitled to ask, either that an assurance such as I have suggested should be given, or, better still, that the right hon. Gentleman should promise not to proceed with the Bill beyond the Second Reading if the House, by allowing the First Reading, enables the Bill to be printed and circulated. It could then be put in the list for next year.

§ The PRESIDENT of the LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD (Mr. Burns)
The hon. Member opposite (Mr. Staveley-Hill) said, quite fairly, that the supporters of this Bill must not assume that the absence of a Division on the First Reading implies that at subsequent stages the opponents will not continue their opposition. We accept that statement in the spirit in which it is made, and we reply by-saying that we recognise the courtesy of the opponents of the Bill in allowing the First Reading to go through on that understanding. The hon. M ember for Worcestershire (Mr. Wilson) has asked two questions, to only one of which is it necessary to reply. He asks whether, if the Bill cannot be got through this Session, the Government would be in favour of carrying it over. That is a reasonable request which demands a reasonable answer, and to it I give an affirmative reply. I cannot give any guarantees as to another place, but so far as the Government are concerned, in the event of the Bill being unable to get through this Session, we should be in favour of its being carried over. I have the greater pleasure in saying that, because, since the inquiry was held, a number of the authorities who then 439 opposed the proposal, seem to be less inclined to continue their opposition, and there is no reason for us to do other than assume that if the Bill gets into Committee, much of the contemplated opposition will subside and probably disappear. I trust that, as I have replied frankly to the question put me, the House will allow the Provisional Order to be read a first time to-night, so that it may assume the character of a Bill and be distributed amongst the authorities affected, in order that when they see the project in clear print, they may know what they have either to oppose or to support. After the clear and able exposition by the Chairman of Ways and Means, I hope the House will now consent to the Motion he has made.

§ Sir FRANCIS LOWE
As representing the promoters of the Bill, I should like to express my appreciation of the courtesy of my right hon. Friends in allowing this Standing Order to be suspended without a Division, and in allowing this Bill to be read the first time. I quite understand, and I am sure everybody will understand, that this does not affect the strength of their opposition to the Bill, but it has been very properly said that this is not the time to bring forward their objections. These objections can be brought forward much more properly on the Second Beading. I am quite sure that the promoters of the Bill will wish to hear these objections thoroughly thrashed out. I agree with the Chairman of Ways and Means that it is most desirable that this matter should not be unduly delayed. It has been thoroughly discussed in the locality, and is now ripe for decision. It might cause very considerable inconvenience, not to say loss, to this municipality and the local authorities which are affected by it. I should also like to express our indebtedness to the President of the Local Government Board for the thoroughness with which he has gone into this matter. He has investigated the circumstances of the case most thoroughly, and in a most able manner, and I think it should, when the proper time comes, be a great argument in favour of the Bill that after having instituted a most exhaustive inquiry into the question the right hon. Gentleman is now, I understand, in favour of this extension of boundaries taking place.

§ Mr. STANLEY BALDWIN
May I ask the President of the Local Government Board what will be the date of the Second Beading?

§ Mr. BURNS
I will take care that everybody interested in the Bill is informed of the date of the Second Beading.

§ Mr. MORTON
I do not know whether it is much use saying anything, because apparently this matter has the support of the Government and the official party; therefore we have not much chance against them whether we are right or wrong. But it does seem to me a most dangerous precedent to break our ordinary Standing Orders for the purpose of bringing in and discussing a Bill that we know nothing about at the present moment. What occurs to me is that it may be very unfair to the opponents of the Bill to try and rush it through this Session. I do not see what we are going to gain by it. We are told that in all human probability the Bill cannot be got through this Session, and that therefore it will have to be carried forward in some way. If that is done those concerned might as well bring it forward next Session. I have been amused by hearing it stated that we might be allowed to break the Standing Orders in this case, because it is a very big undertaking. Sometimes we have had it put to us that it is desirable to pass a measure through in this way because it is a very little one. Now it is the opposite. It is a very unusual proceeding. I believe it will be a very dangerous precedent. If we give it in this case I do not know how we are going fairly to refuse it in other cases, and if hon. Gentlemen who are opposed to this in the interests of their constituents go to a Division on the matter I shall be very pleased to give them my humble support.