§ (1) Any urban district council in Ireland may, in addition to any existing powers, make by-laws providing for the inspection of all meat intended to be sold within the urban district for human consumption, and prohibiting the sale of meat within the urban district for human consumption except after inspection in accordance with the by-laws.
709§ (2) The provisions of sections two hundred and nineteen to two hundred and twenty-three of the Public Health (Ireland) Act, 1878, relative to by-laws shall apply to every by-law made under this Act as they apply to by-laws made under that Act.
§ Mr. BOOTHI beg to move to leave out this Clause and I do so in order that I may get some explanation of the necessity for this Bill. In this country the urban district is not as a rule a market town, but in Ireland as it is mainly an agricultural country the case may be different and this Clause may be necessary. I think, however, some explanation is desirable and therefore I make this proposal.
§ Sir FREDERICK BANBURYI beg to second the Motion to omit the Clause. I have no particular objection to this Bill, but I am not quite sure that I like the power of total prohibition of the sale of meat by an urban district council. I have not put an Amendment down because I believe my hon. Friends behind me are very anxious for this Bill and I presume that the methods which obtain in this country do not always obtain in Ireland. It does seem to me, however, that some such words as "unfit for human consumption" should be introduced so as to restrict the power of prohibition of sale to meat of that description. If hon. Members will look at the Bill, however, they will see that no such words are in the Clause, and it allows every urban district council in Ireland to prohibit the sale of meat for human consumption in their district. I am not quite sure whether that is right, and it appears to me that this Clause might add very much to the power of boycotting. My hon. Friend behind me laughs, but I will explain how this Bill might add considerably to the power of boycotting. There is. we will say, a certain urban district council in Ireland over which the hon. Member (Mr. Patrick O'Brien) is the presiding genius. I do not know whether he ever indulges in boycotting, and I do not want to make any accusation against him. I am only using his name as he happens to be in the House as an illustration of my argument. If he wanted to prevent some gentleman from eating meat he might say to the urban district council: "You must prohibit the consumption of meat." I presume if I lived in an urban district in Ireland I could have meat sent from London, but if I could not afford to have it sent from London and had to buy from 710 the urban district council the hon. Member could prohibit the consumption of meat and I do not see how I could get it, so that this Clause might be used as a means of boycotting. I do not presume for a moment that this was intended. The names at the back of the Bill seem to be a mixture of both parties of Irish Members and I presume it has been agreed amongst them, but I should like to know why we have the great pleasure and honour of the Chief Secretary's presence in the House on a Friday morning?
§ The CHIEF SECRETARY for IRELAND (Mr. Birrell)I have come to hear you.
§ Sir F. BANBURYI always thought the right hon. Gentleman had a great knowledge of what was good. I hope to have the advantage of being instructed in certain methods with regard to the passing of Irish legislation. It might be rather difficult for him to administer Ireland in the strong manner in which he administers that country if there was a Clause of this sort in the Bill. Supposing he was to import troops into a particular district for the purpose of putting down a disturbance, and the urban district council was to prohibit the consumption of meat in that particular district, what would happen then? Perhaps the Attorney-General could give an explanation. If he was ordered to appear for the Crown to prevent the enforcement of this Clause, how would he present the case? I think I have shown some reason why we should have some explanation of what seems to be the rather peculiar drafting of the Clause.
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Member (Mr. Booth) proposes to omit Clause 1. In that case there would be nothing left of the Bill. I do not think I ought to put that question. It is not a question really for Report stage. The objection taken, especially by the hon. Baronet, is to the whole Bill.
§ Sir F. BANBURYI do not object to Sub-section (2) of Clause 1. Perhaps my hon. Friend would withdraw so as to enable me to move to omit Sub-section (l) of Clause 1.
§ Mr. SPEAKERI do not think Sub-section (2) would stand alone. The provisions of section so and so relative to bylaws shall apply to every by-law made under this Act. There is no power to make by-laws.
§ Mr. BOOTHI beg to move, in Subsection (1), to omit the words "and prohibiting the sale of meat within the urban district for human consumption except after inspection in accordance with the by-laws."
Captain CRAIGI hope the hon. Baronet will not persist in this Amendment. It would be a great pity on the face of it if the first part of this Clause was allowed to stand without the latter part because if the urban district council are permitted the powers which are given to them in the first part of Sub-section (1) of providing for the inspection of all meat intended to be sold within the urban district for human consumption and then are prevented from prohibiting the sale of meat within the district for human consumption without any inspection whatever, of course the Bill would be quite useless, and, indeed, would strike at the root of the whole matter. The hon. Member (Mr. Booth) asked the meaning of the Clause and why it is necessary to give urban districts in Ireland additional powers in this respect. The urban district councils in Ireland are the sanitary authorities. Various Public Health Acts passed between 1878 and 1907 give the urban districts in Ireland very wide powers and this Bill is only amplifying those powers and allowing the urban districts to control the smaller class of slaughterhouses. Even in England and Scotland a great many of the slaughter-houses are not conducted as they should be. For a number of years past there has been a great and energetic movement on foot for the prevention of tuberculosis in Ireland, and since I have come to this House there have been a great many efforts made, both by Acts of Parliament and by ordinary departmental machinery, to do what we can to prevent the growth of this dread i disease. This Bill will materially assist; those who have that great object at heart because by taking the utmost possible precautions, first of all in connection with the meat which is to be sold in the district, if killed within the district, you strike at the poorer and more insanitary slaughter-houses, and thus it will prevent meat being brought in which is unfit for human consumption, perhaps cheaper meat, which is not subject to inspection. That would be really a great danger, because you cannot get competition of that sort under healthy conditions; and the very object of the Bill would be defeated if the Amendment were carried.
712 My hon. Friend suggests that we should put in the words "if unfit for human consumption," but I think that matter might be left to the sound common-sense of the particular urban council. The sanitary authority under the Bill has to lay down its own rules, and I do not suppose any district council in Ireland would be desirous of putting forward rules in connection with the slaughter of meat which would interfere with an important trade within the urban district. Surely those who are elected to the councils and who are in touch with the people would take care that there was nothing partial in the rules laid down in the bylaws which they would make. I have studied this matter, and I have always hoped that something would be done. I think my hon. and gallant Friend (Captain O'Neill) is to be heartily congratulated in having steered the Bill to its present stage, with the assent of hon. Members below the Gangway, who are equally interested in this important matter, and I believe with the assistance of the Government. We are now, I hope, on the eve of making more stringent regulations, which are very much required in certain parts of Ireland. Where slaughter-houses are satisfactory, of course the by-laws would not affect them, but if they are in an insanitary condition or causing unnecessary offence in other ways, it would be obligatory on the authorities to take steps to stop the offence. All these matters would be dealt with by the by-laws. I do not anticipate that they would be used as the hon. Baronet has suggested that they might be used—as a means of boycotting. I am sorry that he should be so ingenious as to suggest a new method of that cruel practice in Ireland.
§ Sir F. BANBURYI did not wish to suggest it, I wished to safeguard my hon. and gallant Friend and his Friends, and also my Friends, from the risk which I am afraid they will run through their desire on this particular occasion to act with hon. Members below the Gangway.
Captain CRAIGI wish the hon. Baronet had not put the idea into anybody's head, for some people are quick to pick up such an idea. I do not think there is any real opposition to the Bill. All sides of the House are agreed that it is a good and necessary measure and one which will confer great benefit on the people of Ireland who are interested in the matter. The various Acts which are at present in force in regard to this subject differ in some 713 respects from those in operation in England and Scotland. This Bill is brought forward in no party spirit. It is entirely for the purpose of getting inspection of meat which is necessary in the interest of public health, and I hope it will be passed into law.
§ The ATTORNEY-GENERAL for IRELAND (Mr. Redmond Barry)There is one matter to which I wish to call attention, and I hope it will have the effect of allaying any apprehensions entertained by the hon. Baronet and my hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract. It will be observed that the operation of the Bill will be by by-laws. Under Sub-section (2) of Clause 1 the by-laws must be submitted for confirmation to the Local Government Board in Ireland. An urban district council must publish in the newspapers an advertisement intimating their intention to make an application for by-laws so that there will be full opportunity for inquiry and discussion. I suggest that in any circumstances that should meet the objection of the hon. Baronet.
§ Sir F. BANBURYSupposing a by-law is made and is objected to as I suggested, would it be in the power of the Local Government Board for Ireland to rescind or repeal the by-law?
§ Mr. REDMOND BARRYIf the objection is raised after it has been submitted and confirmed, I should think not. The cost of the application is serious, and objections should be raised before the bylaws are confirmed. There is to be an advertisement of the application in the newspapers, and the proposed by-laws are to be examined into carefully by the Local Government Board. It would be impossible to imagine that the Local Government Board would ever give its sanction to a by-law which was capable of oppressive or illegal use.
Captain CRAIGSurely the hon. and learned Gentleman does not mean to say that if a mistake was made in a bylaw of that kind it could not be rectified afterwards.
§ Mr. REDMOND BARRYIf there was an obvious mistake made it would be possible for the Local Government Board to amend the by-law. I thought the hon. Baronet's question had reference to another matter altogether.
§ Sir F. BANBURYI understand now that a by-law might be altered with the. consent of the urban district council. But my question was: Supposing the urban district council did not consent to the alteration, could the Local Government Board make it?
§ Mr. REDMOND BARRYThe matter must lie with the urban district council. It has to put the proposed by-laws in black and white, and advertise that application is to be made for them. The by-laws will be closely investigated by the Local Government Board, and they will hear all the objections that can be made from any quarter. It is inconceivable that there is any danger of a by-law being passed which would affect anyone injuriously. The hon. Baronet has suggested that there might be improper use of a by-law for boycotting purposes. No such by-law would be allowed to come into existence. The omission of the words proposed to be left out would leave nothing of substance in the Clause because it would be useless to inspect and, if necessary, to condemn meat unless you can prohibit its sale for human consumption. I think the hon. Baronet may be satisfied that there is no real danger involved in the proposal.
§ Mr. CRUMLEYThe urban district councils have full powers at present as regards slaughter-houses, but unfortunately the councils do not appoint the proper persons to carry out the inspection. The inspectors have not a bit of independence about them. They do not perform their duties impartially and condemn meat when necessary. I have witnessed a case myself where three inspectors who were sent to inspect carcases in a public slaughter-house allowed them to be taken away for consumption by the people in the locality, although they were tuberculous. If this Bill passes there should be inserted in it a Clause requiring that the inspection of the meat should be made by an independent person, such as a veterinary surgeon. A man is appointed by a market committee to inspect dead pigs coming into a market place, and perhaps he knows nothing whatever about it, and where tuberculosis existed would not know its appearance. Therefore I think that with the powers which they at present possess the urban district councils possess ample jurisdiction over all slaughterhouses in Ireland if they wish to put them in force and appoint men who will act 715 independently and see that their duties are carried out properly. I will oppose this Bill as it is now.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Motion made and question proposed, "That the Bill be now read the third time."
Captain O'NEILLThere is a very great demand for this Bill, and I thank the hon. Member opposite and the hon. Member below the Gangway for withdrawing their technical objections on the Report stage. I thank all sections of the House for allowing the Bill to get a second reading unopposed, and I thank all sections of representatives from Ireland for their support of this Bill, and especially those who have kindly allowed their names to appear on the Bill. I have got representatives of our own Unionist party and of the Nationalist party and the O'Brienite party, and I think that this unusual fact should commend the Bill to the House. I thank very cordially the Chief Secretary and the Attorney-General for Ireland for the support which they have given to this Bill. I had some difficulty at first in persuading them that the Bill was really necessary, and that it would do no harm and would do a great deal of good, but in the end I was successful in winning them over to support the Bill. I thank the right hon. Gentleman opposite for rising on the Report stage and putting the discussion right. The sense of the Bill as the House will understand was quite unaltered by the Committee stage. All the amendments adopted were proposed by the Attorney-General and I think were drafted by the Government draftsman. I think the Committee were satisfied that the new words expressed better than the original words the meaning of the Bill, but the sense of the Bill remains exactly as it was. The necessity for this Bill arose because many urban district councils in Ireland had erected, very much to their credit, public slaughter-houses at the expense of the ratepayers. But they had no power to enforce the use of these public slaughter-houses by the butchers. So serious was the situation that some of the urban district councils have been actually discussing the advisability of giving up the public slaughter houses altogether as they were simply a source of expense to the rate- 716 payers. In this Bill they will have powers to force meat inspection, and I think that the inevitable result will be that those butchers who now refuse to use public slaughter-houses will avail themselves of the advantage which they get from more sanitary methods and the killing of their meat properly. Only those butchers who are afraid of meat inspection and from whom it may therefore be assumed that the public is receiving meat not fit for human consumption refuse to make use of these slaughter-houses. The Bill was circulated to every single urban district council in Ireland, to the total number of sixty-two, and I think that the Chief Secretary and the local Members of Parliament were sent the resolutions adopted by these various councils.
Captain O'NEILLNo. I am coming to that. The result was to my mind most satisfactory. It was circulated by the Newry Urban District Council. I received myself eighteen resolutions tendering very warm thanks for it. A more important fact is that not a single urban district council in Ireland sent me or anybody else a single resolution adverse to it. The reason why more than eighteen did not send resolutions to me is that every urban district council in Ireland has not got a public slaughter-house. Some time ago I asked the question how many there were in Ireland and the Chief Secretary was unable to give me the information. I feel sure that the effect of this Bill will be to encourage those urban district councils which have not yet erected public slaughter-houses to do so. Great help was received from the Ballymena Urban District Council. It was at their suggestion I introduced this Bill, and they have done their utmost all through to help it forward. They have already adopted the Tuberculous Prevention (Ireland) Act. I think the way they have endeavoured to benefit the public health deserves our gratitude. I will read a resolution which was sent to me, signed by twenty-one district councils. The resolution is as follows:—
That this council strongly approves of the Bill introduced into Parliament by Captain Arthur O'Neill, M.P., which deals with the control of public slaughterhouses and the proper inspection of near believing as we do that an urgent necessity exists or such powers as this Bill would confer on urban district councils, and we respectfully urge upon Mr. Birrell, Chief Secretary for Ireland, to support the measure and to arrange facilities for its passing into law at the earliest possible date.717 In view of the credit which is due to those district councils, I think I ought to read their names to the House:—Ballymena, Newry, Bray, Lurgan, Athlone, Carlow, Blackrock, Bangor, Dungarvan, Navan, Clonakilty, Portadown, Coleraine, Lisburn. Kinsale, Newtownards, Tandragee, and Larne.I also heard of three others from Newry —Killiney, Ballybrack, and Galway.
§ Mr. J. SAMUELThe hon. Member has not given the names of district councils in the south and west of Ireland.
Captain O'NEILLI am afraid the hon. Member opposite is not familiar with the geography of Ireland. I can assure him that the list which I have read is most representative. It comes from constituencies representative of all sections of the Irish party. I think hon. Members from Scotland, amongst others, ought to give their cordial support to this Bill. My hon. Friend who spoke just now apparently implied that Scotland was rather behind in the erection of slaughter-houses. That is not so at all. I think I am right in saying that Scotland is far ahead of any other portion of the United Kingdom in this matter, having powers under the Borough Police (Scotland) Act of 1892. Professor Dittmar, in his report on the working of the slaughterhouses in Scotland points out that all warm-blooded animals are subject to disease which is communicable to human beings, and enforces the necessity of examination before slaughter, and of examination of the carcase and internal organs before the meat is offered for human food.
§ Mr. J. SAMUELWill the hon. Member explain whether, under the powers of this Bill to provide public slaughter-houses there will be compensation to the owners of private slaughter-houses?
Captain O'NEILLIt is not proposed to abolish all private slaughter-houses, but the Bill gives—as I think is made clear by its Clauses—power to the urban district sanitary authorities in Ireland to insist on proper meat inspection. Those authorities who have erected public slaughter-houses in all probability will arrange for the inspection of meat.
§ Mr. J. SAMUELSupposing the private slaughter-houses are in an insanitary state, does the Bill propose to close them?
Captain O'NEILLI think undoubtedly it will in many cases have that effect. As I was pointing out, the urban district 718 councils will insist on meat being inspected at public slaughter-houses by their qualified meat inspectors. The result will inevitably be that the butcher, who has been killing animals in some insanitary slaughter-houses, will be compelled to give it up. I do not think I have gone unduly into these matters, and I thank hon. Members for the support they have given the Bill.
§ Mr. BOOTHThere is one point as to which I am not quite sure that the hon. Member gives an effective answer. The hon. Baronet (Sir F. Banbury) was somewhat uneasy as to the possible misuse by an urban district council of the powers given under this Bill; but surely the officials of the Government Department have the power to simply wipe out such an urban district authority.
§ Sir F. BANBURYIt comes rather as a surprise to me that the effect of this Bill is to make butchers use public slaughterhouses. I was very pleased not to object to the Second Beading of this measure, but as the House knows I have always objected to the Second Reading of a Bill being passed after eleven o'clock, when there is no opportunity for its being adequately explained, and for the House obtaining a proper understanding of its object. I am not at all sure that I would have assented to the Second Reading if I had known that this Bill would compel butchers to use the public slaughterhouses erected by the local authorities. It seems to me rather a strong order that a local authority, finding that the slaughter-house it has erected is not being used, should, under the cloak that a measure was needed for the inspection of meat, bring in a Bill to compel the butcher to use a slaughter-house he does not want to use. If this had been an English Bill, and if that had been the explanation of its provisions, I am not at all sure that I should not have deemed it my duty to divide the House against it. As this happens to be an Irish Bill, and there is a consensus of Irish opinion in favour of it, I do not think I shall trouble the House to go to a division. The Bill is ostensibly for the purpose of inspecting meat, but its real object is to compel butchers to use slaughter-houses provided by other people.
§ Mr. J. SAMUELTo compel them, I understand, to take the meat from their private slaughter-houses to the public slaughter-house for inspection.
§ Sir F. BANBURYI am glad of the support of the hon. Members, though I am very much surprised that the question should be asked from the benches opposite whether the Bill provides compensation for the destruction of private slaughter-houses. I did not think hon. Members opposite attached much importance to compensation. I am glad they are altering their opinion, and are coming to the view that whether in the case of a municipal authority or a Government that there should be compensation given. I am glad that the hon. Member has come to that view. He is the last man I would expect to have done so, but I presume he has been influenced by my arguments and the arguments of the hon. Member for Pontefract (Mr. Booth). I think it is rather a tall order to have the proposals that are in this Bill, which is a most innocent looking Bill on the face of it. My hon. Friend read out the name of Ballymena Urban Council as being in favour of this Bill, and said that they had got a nurse—
Captain O'NEILLThey have a nurse under the Tuberculosis Act, but it has nothing to do with this Bill. I mentioned it in passing as showing that Ballymena, one of the urban councils which had taken such a prominent part in promoting this Hill, had done all they could in other respects towards the prevention of tuberculosis.
§ Sir F. BANBURYAn hon. Member below the Gangway alluded to the fact that certain inspectors in Ireland did not do their duty, but I think he was under a wrong impression as to the effect of the Bill. I do not propose to trouble the House with a Division, but the Bill is rather a lesson to the hon. Member for Pontefract, who has, if he will allow me to say so, taken a very active part and a very intelligent part in the proceedings of this House, and I hope he will bear in mind that it is a very dangerous thing to let a Bill go through after eleven o'clock because you cannot tell what particular surprise the Bill will develop.
§ Mr. REDMOND BARRYMay I say one word as regards the position of the Government with regard to the interpretation put on the Bill by the hon. Gentleman? It is not possible to bring about such a result, namely, that the urban district council should prevent any private slaughter-houses being used. A general 720 regulation or by-law to that effect would prima facie be rejected by the Local Government Board as utterly unreasonable, unless some public reason could be stated to justify it. It is a very grave matter to private slaughter-houses. That is not the object of the Bill, nor is it the effect of it in any reasonable construction of it. It might happen that there might be no sanitary slaughter-houses in the district. The object of the Bill is not to bring about such a result. It would be not only an unreasonable use of it but altogether outside of it.
§ Question put, and agreed to.
§ Bill read the third time accordingly, and passed.