HC Deb 17 July 1911 vol 28 cc678-9
Mr. CASSEL

asked the President of the Local Government Board whether he is aware that Mr. W. Arlidge appealed to the Board from a closing order made by the Hampstead Borough Council in respect of 83, Palmerston Road, and furnished reports by Dr. Wynter Blyth, President of the Royal Sanitary Institute, and other experts, that the house was quite habitable and the closing order unjustifiable; that on the 23rd May, 1911, the solicitors for Mr. Arlidge wrote to the Board requesting that in lieu of incurring the expense of appearing at the local inquiry he might be allowed an opportunity of stating his case to the Board, but no reply was sent to such letter other than a mere formal acknowledgment, and that subsequently a letter was sent to Mr. Arlidge informing him that an order of the Board would shortly be issued confirming the closing order without giving Mr. Arlidge an opportunity of stating his case to the Board; and whether the Board will delay the issue of any order until Mr. Arlidge has been afforded such opportunity?

Mr. BURNS

The hon. Member has not, I fear, been fully informed as to the facts in this case. It is the case that Mr. Arlidge appealed to the Board against a closing order made by the Hampstead Borough Council, and that reports were furnished by him from Dr. Wynter Blyth and from a firm of surveyors in support of his appeal. The Housing Town Planning etc., Act, 1909, provides that the Board shall not dismiss an appeal against a closing order without having first held a public local inquiry, and the Board accordingly intimated to both parties, on the 13th May, that the public local inquiry would be held on the 24th May. The letter from the appellant's solicitors, which was only received on the day fixed for the inquiry, stated definitely that the appellant had decided not to appear at the inquiry. The inquiry was held by one of the Board's inspectors, and the dwelling house in question inspected by him, and after full consideration the Board decided that the closing order should be confirmed. The appellant had ample opportunity of stating his case at the public local inquiry had he so desired, and I see no reason to delay the issue of the order conveying the Board's decision.

Mr. CASSEL

Will the right hon. Gentleman not give this gentleman an opportunity of stating his case? I quite agree that he, perhaps, ought to have appeared before the local inquiry, but in the special circumstances I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in view of the report, he will not give the gentleman an opportunity of stating his case?

Mr. BURNS

If the hon. Gentleman himself knew all the special circumstances applying to this very special litigant, I do not think he would press me to do what he asks me to do.