§ 1. If the Local Government Board for Scotland in the exercise of their powers under the Housing Act, 1914, make arrangements with any authorised society in connection with the provision of dwellings and gardens and other works and buildings for, or for the convenience of, persons employed by or on behalf of the Admiralty at or in the neighbourhood of Rosyth Dockyard, it shall be lawful for the society on obtaining the approval of the Board thereto, and without any other sanction, to carry into operation within the area to which the arrangements relate 2207 any scheme or schemes of the society for such provision as aforesaid, including all necessary preparation or adaptation of the land, such as the making of roads, streets, and open spaces, and the execution of all works of whatever description subsidiary or incidental to such dwellings and buildings or the erection thereof, or to the provision of drainage, water supply, and other services in connection therewith, and, if necessary, the utilisation of facilities for such services whether under existing powers or under powers to be conferred on any authority by the scheme. So far as necessary for the proper carrying out of any such scheme, the Board may suspend any statutory enactments, bye-laws, regulations, or other provisions, under whatever authority made, which are in operation in the area included in the scheme.
Mr. PONSONBYI beg to move, after the word "dockyards," to insert the words "pending the approval of a town-planning scheme for the area to which the arrangements relate."
I sent in a series of Amendments to the Table, and perhaps I may be allowed to explain that they all hang together, and are the result of a conference with the Secretary for Scotland. I would like to thank the right hon. Gentleman not only for having acceded to my request to postpone the further stage of this Bill until to-day, but also for having met a deputation from the Dunfermline Town Council in a very conciliatory spirit, and acceded to their request. The Amendments which I put down secure the recognition of the local authorities, which would have been superseded entirely by the Bill as originally drafted, after the heavy expenditure which they have already incurred, and which they would have to incur in future. The Bill will now be operative for a period until the town-planning scheme is approved, which I hope will be in a very short time, and then it can be modified and adapted in such a way as to fit in with the actual building that has taken place in the interval in this area. In general, the Bill as amended will be for the convenience of the public, and is very much welcomed by the Dunfermline Town Council, who will now be able to get to work at a scheme which they have had so much at heart for so long, and will be able to co-operate with the Government in the primary object of the Bill, which is the immediate erection of dwelling-houses in this area.
§ Sir H. CRAIKIn listening to the speech of the hon. Member who has just sat down, one would have supposed that this Bill related only to some small local interest, in which the primary object was to see that there was adequate representation of that local interest and that the local board should have a sufficient amount of power. This is one of those emergency Bills for which immediate necessity is claimed. One has only to glance at it to see its infinite importance in regard to the question of the Navy. Surely the principal point in this Bill is not how it affects the town of Rosyth, but how it affects the naval base at Rosyth, and how it fits in with the plans of the Admiralty generally. Is it convenient that a Bill of this sort should be laid before the House with a whole series of Amendments relating to the very principle of the Bill—
§ Sir H. CRAIKAnd that these should be introduced suddenly and not placed on the Table of the House, and that this should be done by some arrangement made in the Scottish Office between the hon. Member for Montrose Burghs and the Secretary for Scotland? The principle of this Bill is perfectly clear. It leaves the matter in the hands of the Admiralty, and not of a single small local body, but of the Local Government Board for Scotland. This morning I received a paper, which I suppose was received by most Members, on behalf of the opponents of the Bill, the Dunfermline Town Council. This paper embodies every sort of principle with regard to legislation which I most detest when put forward by a very small local body for the purpose of setting aside the larger Imperial interests connected with this Bill.
§ Sir H. CRAIKI do not think that will be regarded as a witticism by the House. It is said that there are no precedents for the conditions prevailing at the present time, and every possible excuse for delay is put forward. There have been arrangements with the town council about roadways and tramways, and all those things are excuses for delay. And now there is a further delay of this large Imperial scheme by this little local council, which thinks its interests, its arrangements, its private bargains as to railways, as to tramways, 2209 and as to the erection of dwellings, ought to come before the larger interests involved in this Bill. I object to Amendments of this kind being brought in upon a Bill which, presumably, was carefully considered by the Government and put forward by them in its original form because they thought it was necessary, for special reasons, to confine the jurisdiction to the Admiralty and the Local Government Board of Scotland. I object to the Bill being fundamentally altered by bringing in, on the authority of a small local council, Amendments which have never been put on the Paper, and which we have only had casually supplied to us, as the result of an agreement with the Scottish Minister. I wonder whether the Admiralty have considered it, and whether their representative is prepared to accept it. If a new principle is introduced into the Bill, if the local body is to be master of the situation, why was that not considered when the Bill was first brought before the House? Why, when this emergency Bill was presented by the Secretary for Scotland and the Civil Lord of the Admiralty, was it put into its original and special form, and why is it now to be changed? It is clearly a transaction between the hon. Member for Stirling Burghs and the Secretary for Scotland. I wish to know what was the reason—if the Bill was to be altered by Amendments not on the Paper—for putting it in a form and based on a principle entirely opposed to the present position, the local body not then being the authority, as now proposed?
The SECRETARY for SCOTLAND (Mr. McKinnon Wood)Nine-tenths of the questions put by the hon. Member who has just spoken would not have been submitted by him had he been present at the Second Reading Debate last night. It will be in the recollection of the House that the representation was made by hon. Members that this was a matter capable of accommodation with the Dunfermline authority, and I willingly foil into the suggestion. It is not a bargain between the hon. Member for Stirling Burghs and myself; it is a bargain between the local authority and myself. I really see no occasion for the profound contempt which the hon. Gentleman pours upon the local authority. I am bound to say that throughout I consider that the Dunfermline authority has shown an excellent public spirit, and I am only too glad that I have been able through a reasonable compromise with them—"compromise" is hardly the right word: a 2210 reasonable arrangement of terms—to attain an object essential to the Government, and at the same time recognising the spirit in which this body has performed its duty.
§ Sir H. CRAIKWhy did you exclude them in the first instance?
Mr. McKINNON WOODI am not going back on the question, which has already been discussed. The whole trouble arose from the fact of a certain decision by the Commission in Scotland giving new powers to tramway companies in connection with the laying down of roads, thus altering the whole scheme of our control, and rendering it necessary to bring in a Bill safeguarding the Admiralty workers. I am not going back on all that. These proposed Amendments do not at all prevent or delay the progress of the building of cottages; on the contrary, they will assist the progress of the building of cottages. The town of Dunfermline has not only spent £100,000 upon the drainage of this area, but it is willing to assist with money the provision of these houses; and I am really bound to stand up for the town of Dunfermline against the utterly uninformed strictures of the hon. Member. I am perfectly certain that he would not have made them had he been acquainted with the circumstances. The only difference between the Bill we introduced and this Bill is, not that the power of the Local Government Board for Scotland to sanction the carrying out of this work is done away with, but that we have allowed the local authority to consider the scheme and to pass it through the ordinary procedure. Surely it is much better if you can arrange matters by consultation, and by the consultation we have had to day we have been able to arrive at a procedure that, without doing away with the purpose of the original Bill, will save the position of the local authority. Surely it is desirable we should do that.
I have been asked whether we obtained the opinion of the Admiralty. We had a representative of the Admiralty at the conference to-day, and he entirely agreed with these Amendments. As they come up without notice—it could not be otherwise—I think I ought to explain their object. The first Amendment, as the hon. Member for Sterling Burghs explained, is to insert the words, "Pending the approval of the town planning scheme for the area to which the arrangement relates." That is very little more than a drafting Amend- 2211 ment, and it only means that if the borough is able to carry a town planning scheme, with some modifications, this provisional arrangement shall only apply during the intervening period. All the other Amendments amount to nothing more than this, that these plans shall come before the Guild Court of the borough of Dunfermline, and if the town council should refuse or unduly delay the granting of authority, such authority may be forthwith granted by the Board—meaning the Local Government Board in Scotland. All the objects which the hon. Gentleman rightly thinks should be achieved are achieved, while giving that recognition to the public authority which they well deserve.
§ Sir F. BANBURYThe right hon. Gentleman said that my hon. Friend was not here on the Second Reading, that he would not repeat what he had said on the Second Reading, that my hon. Friend did not know in the least what he was talking about, and that the Amendments were of the very slightest description. That may possibly be true, but at any rate that is not the way in which to deal with the matter. First of all, the right hon. Gentleman never answered the question why it was necessary to alter the Government Bill. I myself went away yesterday evening at getting on for half-past ten o'clock after having read this Bill. I did not very much approve of it, but I did not see anything which, at the first moment, I objected to. I had not any idea that it was going to be altered because one particular Member said that his particular town council wanted it altered. I do not think amendments and alterations of that sort should be moved in manuscript. Nobody knew that there were to be Amendments at all; we had no means of knowing they were not on the Paper. You have been waiting ten months for this Bill; why should you not wait two or three days when you can have the Amendments put down. You might even take them tomorrow.
§ Sir F. BANBURYThe War has been going on for ten months; the work at Rosyth has been going on for ten years, and the question of housing has been brought up during the last four or five years.
Mr. McKINNON WOODThe circumstances which necessitated this Bill have not existed for ten months or ten weeks. But all this was explained on the Second Reading last night.
§ Sir F. BANBURYThis Bill is to provide houses at Rosyth for workmen engaged in the work which is going on there; it is not work required for the War; and under those circumstances I certainly object to the course which is now proposed. No Bill ought to be brought forward now unless it is required for war purposes.
§ The CHAIRMANThe House has passed the Second Reading of the Bill, and sent it to the Committee for consideration of detail.
§ Sir F. BANBURYI can object to the Third Reading, if necessary, and in view of the attitude the right hon. Gentleman has taken I shall certainly do so, reserving my remarks for the Third Reading. It does seem to me that my hon. Friend made a very strong case. Why are these Amendments necessary? Surely the Government must have known what to do when they brought forward a Bill of this sort; we are entitled to suppose that it was after due consideration. Yet it would appear to have been necessary, at the last moment, and without any Amendments having been put upon the Paper, to come forward with these alterations, without our possibly being able to know what they mean. The least the right hon. Gentleman could have done would have been to apologise that the Government did not know their own business, to have said that that it put the Committee to considerable inconvenience not having the Amendments upon the Paper, and that it was hopeless for us under the circumstances to allow the Amendments to go on. Instead of that, he practically said to my hon. Friend, "You have no business to interfere at all; it is a settled matter between me and a supporter behind me, and that is sufficient for all of us."
§ Mr. C. E. PRICEI am surprised the hon. Baronet has waxed so eloquent about this arrangement. He said he objected to manuscript Amendments, but I am quite sure that it must be within his recollection that he is the very Member of the House who on one occasion handed a written Amendment to the Speaker which had the effect of putting the present Government into a minority, and that was thought a tremendous event.
§ Sir F. BANBURYMay I point out that I brought in an Amendment to a Bill introduced by the present Government? The Secretary for Scotland has brought in his Bill, and he has consented to Amendments of his own Bill, which is quite a different thing.
§ 6.0 P.M.
§ Mr. PRICEMy sole point is that the hon. Baronet was, on that occasion, very successful with a manuscript Amendment. Surely, at a time like this, when there is no question of the Government being at stake, he will not persist in his opposition to this Bill! I sincerely trust that he will not do so. I confess I had a good deal of sympathy with the hon. Member for Glasgow University, as there were certain things in the Bill which I do not like. It proposed to give to authorities outside the town council a very great deal of power. That has been changed, and I am very glad that an arrangement has been come to and that these Amendments have been accepted.
§ Question, "That those words be there inserted," put, and agreed to.
Mr. PONSONBYI beg to move, to leave out the words "any authorised society" [make arrangements with any authorised society"], and to insert instead thereof the words "the Town Council of Dunfermline."
I think the hon. Member for Glasgow University is a little bit unfair on the Dunfermline Town Council. They are not bringing in Amendments with a view to any profit or advantage to themselves. Their desire is to work the scheme in the best possible method, and that is also the desire of the Government. The Government inserted in the original Bill the authorised society as the authority through which to work it, but on consideration and after meeting the local authority, they came to the conclusion that the Dunfermline Town Council would be the far better authority. Both the town council and the Government are doing their utmost to see that this scheme is put into practice at once, and in the best possible way. I trust that the hon. Baronet will not think it desirable to oppose either these Amendments or the Third Reading.
§ Amendment agreed to.
Mr. PONSONBYI beg to move, to leave out the words "and without any other sanction," and to insert instead thereof the words "to grant authority to the society."
§ Sir H. CRAIKThere is not a word about a society in the Bill as now drafted. What is the society?
Mr. PONSONBYThe hon. Member showed considerable ignorance of the geography of the locality in his speech, and he is now showing ignorance of the Bill as drafted, because he will see in line 7 "authorised society."
§ Sir H. CRAIK"Any authorized society." I want to know what is the society?
Mr. PONSONBYThe original idea of the Government was to work through a building society. They are now prepared to substitute for that society by these Amendments the Town Council of Dunfermline.
§ Mr. RAWLINSONI make a point of attending here like my hon. Friend the Member for the City (Sir F. Banbury). I ask what is the meaning of this Amendment? Last night it was to be a society and now the town council. Surely we are entitled to have an explanation of this sudden change of front? The hon. Member (Mr. Ponsonby) is really no better than his Leader in conciliating any opposition in order to get the Bill through. The way to do that is not to say that an hon. Member like my hon. Friend here is ignorant of the Bill. I daresay I could show that he was ignorant of the effects of some of these Amendments if I had the opportunity of seeing them on the Paper. It requires a very good deal of skill to understand the effect of Amendments pitchforked into a Bill after being read from the Chair. It is certainly not the way to treat the House of Commons. Some hon. Members seem to think that if the Government come down and make a speech and say the Bill is desirable that that should be an end of it. Apparently a deputation from the Dunfermline Town Council met the right hon. Gentleman yesterday, and the Bill is changed. The Government is distinctly to blame for not having seen those people before. They ought not to bring in a Bill of this kind unless they have satisfied themselves that the local authority has been fairly and properly dealt with. I feel very strongly that the Committee has not been fairly treated in this matter. The House of Commons has the duty, as well as the right, to see that they understand legislation before it goes through.
§ Mr. PRETYMANI do know the geography of the country at Rosyth. I think that a very large change has been made in the matter of principle. Am I right in supposing that the original Bill intended to fulfil a purely national purpose? That is to say, that the Admiralty was to hand over to an association of a purely national character and without any local interests this housing question, and that that nationally organised association, in conjunction with the Government and their representatives, was to carry out a necessary national work without being hampered by any local by-laws whatever. Are the Government now, without notice and by manuscript Amendments, proposing to alter the whole character of this Bill from a national proposal to a proposal in which local interests will be consulted? And instead of an association ad hoc with the Government, it is to be the Dunfermline Local Council with the Government. I understand that the powers given to the association are now to be given instead to the Dunfermline Town Council.
§ The CIVIL LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. G. Lambert)That is not so.
Mr. McKINNON WOODI think it is better I should explain the whole situation. I must point out that on the Amendment I was not entitled to do it, but it was done to a very large extent last night on the Second Reading. I am sure that such a stickler for order as the hon. Baronet (Sir F. Banbury) will agree that I should be quite out of Order in going into the matter fully on the Amendment. The position is this. Everybody in the House is agreed that it is very urgent to provide cottages for the workmen at Rosyth. Some months ago a Bill was introduced and passed through the House, with general consent, making arrangements for that housing. I am much obliged to the hon. and gallant Member (Mr. Pretyman) for helping me by his question. It is, as he said, the fact that the Government proposed to take power to deal through a public utility society with this housing question. The Local Government Board for Scotland has taken a great deal of trouble and has got together this public utility society to deal with the housing. This Bill has nothing to do with all that ancient history, except in this respect. It so happens that a few months ago a Committee on Private Bill legislation sat in Scotland, and had to deal with an application of a tramway 2216 company. This thing is really an exceedingly small thing—a very small thing indeed—but it is very important, and very urgent, because it is very necessary that those houses should be provided. There was a tramway company which had power to proceed along a certain road with its trams. I must recognise that the town of Dunfermline have shown great public spirit and has spent a great deal of money in connection with this scheme, and I really must defend them against unfair attacks.
The town of Dunfermline made a town planning scheme, which is now before the Local Government Board. The Committee that sat in Scotland a month ago heard an application from the tramway company to bring their tramway down another road. I am not now going into any question as to whether the decision arrived at was right or was wrong—that is not the point. That decision altered the town planning scheme. The tramway company got permission to go down that other road, and now it is understood that the tramway company will take the last power and not act on the first power at present. And that has altered the town planning scheme and has caused great inconvenience to Dunfermline. There is a provision in the Town Planning Act that after a town planning scheme is prepared with the sanction of the Local Government Board any person who builds in contravention of the town planning scheme may be called upon to remove his buildings without compensation. You cannot expect a public utility company to build with the danger of having to take away their buildings without compensation. That is the whole necessity for this Bill. I explained it all last night very carefully on the proper occasion to do so—that is, on the Second Reading. We had a discussion, and this Bill was the result. Last night an appeal was made to me to see the Burgh of Dunfermline. I have seen them, and they have suggested certain amendments. What do they amount to? Under the Bill, the Local Government Board for Scotland could give permission to the public utility society to proceed with their scheme. The town council came to me to-day and said, "We still hope, notwithstanding this trouble over the tramway, to get over the difficulty, and, with some mortification, still to proceed with our scheme. Will you therefore put in the words, 'pending approval of the town planning scheme.'" Those are the words upon which discussion 2217 has arisen. There cannot be any harm in them. The position stands thus: If this trouble had not arisen we should have adopted the town planning scheme of Dunfermline and built in accordance with it. Owing to the urgency, we thought it necessary to give the Local Government Board power to protect the public utility society against forfeiture and to sanction the scheme. Surely there is no harm—indeed, it is only reasonable if you can do it while achieving that object—in letting the Burgh of Dunfermline express an opinion upon the matter and in letting the plans be recorded in the Dean of Guild Court. That is all that the Amendment does; because the Burgh Council of Dunfermline have agreed that if they do not pass the scheme the Local Government Board shall have power to pass it. So that the scheme is essentially the Bill of last night, with certain concessions to the Burgh of Dunfermline—concessions which were rather urged upon me by Members of the House on Second Reading. That is the whole story. It has all arisen out of a decision of the Commission—I do not say an unfortunate decision, except in the sense that it upset the town planning scheme. The Burgh of Dunfermline gets no more power than it would have had but for this proposal; in fact, it has rather less power, because it may be overruled.
§ Sir F. BANBURYI have now got a copy of the right hon. Gentleman's speech on the Second Reading. After saying what he had just told us about the tramway, he proceeds:—
The House will appreciate that it is quite unreasonable to expect this company to find this money to build and run the risk of having their buildings removed without compensation. We must, therefore, bring in a provision to protect them against that risk. That is the whole object of this Bill. The model upon which it is based is the Clause in the Housing Act of 1909, Section 55, Sub-section (2). I am very sorry for the Town Council for Dumfermline that their plans have been disarranged in this way. They have my heartiest sympathy, but I am sure that when they come to consider it they will not desire to interfere with the provisions of the housing of workmen at Rosyth."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Monday, 17th May 1915, col. 2092.]That was the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman about ten o'clock last night. Now he has changed it all. He has seen the Rosyth people, and he is no longer sorry for them; he is going to do something for them. It is evident that when the right hon. Gentleman brought in the Bill yesterday he knew all about this Dunfermline question, but he did not intend to deal with it, and he did not put it in the Bill. It is only at the last moment, 2218 under the pressure of hon. Gentlemen opposite, he has changed his mind and put down Amendments, the object of which nobody knows. I would point out that the right hon. Gentleman, in replying on the discussion last night, used these words:—The Commission which sat duly considered the case of Dunfermline and the case put before it against the tramways by the town of Dunfermline, and it was decided that this was the proper line. It is not my duty to argue about that matter."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, Monday, 17th May, 1915, col. 2098.]If the right hon. Gentleman had only stuck to the position which he announced yesterday, we should have had none of this trouble; but he has given way, and he has not given us the reasons that actuated him. This Debate ought really to be adjourned, so that we might see the Amendments on the Paper and know what we are doing.
§ Question, "That those words be there inserted," put, and agreed to.
§ Further Amendment made: Leave out the words "area to which the arrangements relate," and insert the words "aforesaid area."—[Mr. Ponsonby.]
Mr. PONSONBYI beg to move, after the words "scheme" ["under powers to be conferred on any authority by the scheme"], to insert the words "and the Dean of Guild Court of the Burgh of Dunfermline shall forthwith approve any plans submitted to the Court in pursuance of any such scheme."
§ Mr. PRETYMANI really think it would have been far better to have left the Bill in its original form, especially when the Government put forward the plea of urgency. As far as I understand the matter, the original Bill simply gave the Local Government Board for Scotland power to pass these plans irrespective of the town planning scheme. What the Government now propose is, at the instance of the Burgh of Dunfermline, to say that the Local Government Board will only come in after the society have been through the mill of the Burgh of Dunfermline. They have to go to the Burgh of Dunfermline, and it is only if the Burgh refuse their sanction they have to go to the Local Government Board. I do not want to delay this Bill; I only want to get the necessary business through and not make unnecessary trouble in the future. Both sides of the House are anxious to get the Bill through. If the right hon. Gentleman, in order to please the Burgh of Dunfermline, sticks in this unnecessary link 2219 in the chain, is that going to help the national object? If this unnecessary obstruction is inserted in the Bill, what will you do when the Burgh of Dunfermline comes to loggerheads with the society? The right hon. Gentleman does not think that that will happen, but it is possible. To which party will the Local Government Board listen then—the society or the Burgh of Dunfermline? I really think that as a matter of plain business it would have been far better from a national point of view to have left the Bill as it was. We are not here to consider the wishes of this burgh or of that, or of this individual or of that; we are here to get the national business done in the best possible way. My hon. Friends are right in suggesting that if this delay is inserted we are perfectly justified in saying that we ought to have time to consider the Amendments, and that the Bill ought to be held over for that purpose.
Mr. McKINNON WOODI think I shall satisfy the hon. and gallant Gentleman when I point out that if this circumstance had not happened all this procedure would have taken place. They would have had to submit to the Dean of Guild Court, and they would have had to submit to the town planning scheme. We are not introducing a new power for the burgh, but are taking away a power which they have. I never want to take away unnecessarily powers from local authorities, and we cannot, in time of war, interfere with the progress of necessary business. I can assure my hon. Friend that I found the burgh representatives to-day extremely anxious to further this scheme and to get the cottages erected. They are very much interested in the matter, and I do not think there is any ground for the suspicion that they will delay it. They have given us the most ample security, because, if they do delay it, the Local Government Board can step in and deal with the matter. The burgh council can be of very great assistance to us in dealing with this matter; they are willing to be of such assistance, and I hope that the Committee will not, for a reason I really cannot follow, prevent the matter from going through. We do not ask that a discretion should be given to the Dean of Guild Court, but simply that they shall place the matter on their records.
§ Mr. CURRIEI am as anxious as anyone that these houses should be built. I have always thought that the conditions at Rosyth were far from creditable. The 2220 right hon. Gentleman was quite entitled to listen to the representations of the Burgh of Dunfermline; but, before the Bill goes through, I hope he will amplify the statement he has made. By so doing he would make smoother the remaining stages of the Bill. When the inquiry was being conducted at Edinburgh we had before us parties other than the Corporation of Dunfermline. The Parliamentary Secretary assured me that no prejudice was being done to the tramway company, who hold a Parliamentary title. I would like to know whether the other parties concerned—Lord Elgin and other proprietors—have had the same opportunity as the Dunfermline Burgh Council of considering this Bill, and to be assured that no prejudice is being worked to them. It is due to them and to the Committee that that explanation should be given.
Mr. McKINNON WOODI do not think it is a question of consulting Lord Elgin at all; it is not his land, it is Admiralty land.
§ Mr. RAWLINSONThe Amendment, as I understand it, proposes that the matter shall go before a certain tribunal for purposes of registration. Is not that different from the previous Amendment, "pending the approval of a town planning scheme"? Will not that cause delay? As the Bill came in last night you could carry matters through without any delay at all. Will not the effect of this Amendment be that you will have, first of all, to wait for the approval of the town planning scheme, and then—
Mr. McKINNON WOODThe object of this Bill is to prevent our having to wait for the approval of the town planning scheme. It is only pending the approval that we go on without paying any regard to the town planning scheme.
§ Mr. PRETYMANWe do not want to delay the Bill. Supposing it were put down for first Order to-morrow?
§ Mr. PRETYMANCould it not be arranged? I think arrangements could be made perfectly well, and we should then see the Amendments in print.
§ Sir F. BANBURYMy hon. Friend means that the Committee stage should be completed to-day, and then, if the alterations were printed, the Bill could be put 2221 down as first Order, and we could have the Third Reading in plenty of time to enable the Bill to go to another place. We should then know what we were doing.
Mr. PONSONBYI apologise for having put the Amendments in this way, but there was no other course open to me. I understood that the final stages were to be taken to-day, and that the only method open to me was to hand in the Amendments at the Table. I quite appreciate the difficulty that hon. Members are in through not having seen the Amendments. But I could mot see what other course I could have followed in view of the fact that the Bill has to be got through to-day.
§ Mr. LAMBERTMay I make an appeal to the hon. and gallant Gentleman and also to the hon. Baronet the Member for the City of London? I am sure what we want is more houses built at the earliest possible moment on the Admiralty land at Rosyth, and unless we can act on this Bill, through the public utility society, the Government will have to build themselves. This is a thing I have worked very hard for for two years, or at any rate twelve months, to avoid, and at last we have the public utility society formed, they will undertake the construction of these houses. For reasons which have been explained clearly by my right hon. Friend, from the fact that the town planning scheme had grown up around the tramway route, which was approved in 1910, and from the fact that the Commission the other day in Edinburgh upset that scheme or modified it, the whole town planning has to be done over again. That being so, we want now, without reference to this town planning, to authorise the public utility society to build a certain number of houses for the workmen at Rosyth. If we do not do that, then the Government has to build, and I am perfectly certain that the hon. and gallant Gentleman and the hon. Baronet will agree with me that it is far better that this work should be done through a public utility society than that the Admiralty should undertake it.
I assure hon. Gentlemen opposite that in this matter the borough of Dunfermline has been very patriotic and spent a very large sum of money. It has taken a lot of trouble in regard to town planning, and naturally it is a little upset that the scheme of town planning has been, so to 2222 speak, almost wrecked because the Parliamentary Committee—I do not say for or against, whether they were right or wrong, I do not argue—but the Parliamentary Committee have given powers for an alternative route, and that has destroyed, or at any rate put back, the town planning scheme upon which the town of Dunfermline spent so much money. My right hon. Friend has endeavoured to bring everybody in, and to keep everybody, if I may say so, sweet, including the town council of Dunfermline. If we get what we desire it would not lead to any delay. I can assure hon. Gentlemen opposite that the Admiralty will see that there is no undue delay. I do ask them, since I am perfectly certain that this Bill is carrying out a policy that they would approve, to trust us in this matter, and let us get the Bill at the earliest possible moment. A month's delay is a very serious matter at this time of the year. [HON. MEMBERS: "One day!"] I am afraid the Bill could not be got through to-morrow. [HON. MEMBERS: "Yes!"] Well, I am informed not.
I cannot speak for the Government, but I have no objection to one day's delay, provided it does not wreck or prevent the Bill going through. All we want is to get the Bill. May I make a suggestion to hon. Gentlemen opposite? Suppose these Amendments are on the Paper to-morrow morning, and there are any that can be legitimately objected to, they may, if they do not make the Bill impossible, be taken in the other House. I only want to get the Bill. [HON. MEMBERS: "Get the Committee stage to-night!"] I am informed we will not get through if we do not get beyond that. If the hon. Baronet (Sir F. Banbury) will guarantee that the Bill shall be got through to-morrow, on that condition we shall be pleased to fall in with any arrangement that he suggests. I am sure the hon. Members opposite, like us, want to get the Bill.
§ Mr. PRETYMANI do not think the right hon. Gentleman's plans will work; if the Amendments are reserved for the Lords and come back here the Bill would obviously be delayed for a month.
§ Mr. LAMBERTI do not think so.
§ Mr. PRETYMANWe are all agreed on the main issue, but I am afraid the right hon. Gentleman, in his sweetening process, has forgotten the House of Commons.
§ Mr. LAMBERTI am sure he did not.
§ Mr. PRETYMANAfter all, the House of Commons is responsible. Bills are brought in and amended out of all recognition by manuscript Amendments, and surely it is not out of reason to ask for one day's delay in order to have the Amendments printed, and to take the responsibility which is ours! That is really the whole point. The Bill can perfectly well be passed through to-morrow. All that we ask is that we shall see the Bill in print to-morrow: we shall see the Amendments, and, as we hope, we shall not be merely repeating ourselves. My hon. Friend proposes to conclude the Committee stage and take Report as the first order to-morrow; then if we find, as we hope we may find, these Amendments can be dealt with, the right hon. Gentlemen opposite will get the Report stage and the Third Reading, and the Bill can then go through with the consent of the House.
§ Sir H. CRAIKThe right hon. Gentleman really misunderstands our position on this side. We are all agreed on the main principle of this Bill as it stands now, and we are anxious to expedite the Bill. What the right hon. Gentleman fails to understand is that while we do not object to the principle of the Bill, we object to the alterations now introduced, and introduced without being put on the Paper—without our being able to understand or grasp fully their meaning. The Civil Lord of the Admiralty explained the object of the Bill to us. We are anxious to see the Bill passed in the form it was explained, but it has been altered so largely that it is no longer a matter between the Local Government Board for Scotland, the public utility society, and the Admiralty. There has been brought in a new possibility, a new element. It is on these points that I assure the right hon. Gentleman that we need elucidation and explanation. We have no desire to delay the Bill, but surely, under all the circumstances, it would be better to follow the course suggested and finish the Bill tomorrow, because it could be got through its necessary stages before the Adjournment.
§ Mr. LAMBERTMy right hon. Friend and I are extremely anxious to meet the wishes of hon. Gentlemen opposite. We are all agreed upon the principle of this Bill. May I take it that if the Committee stage is finished to-night, that unless there is some very serious objection, the Report 2224 stage and the Third Reading shall be taken to-morrow, practically sub silentio. May I take it that that will be so? [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"]
§ Question, "That those words be there inserted," put, and agreed to.
§ Further Amendment made: At the end of Sub-section (1) add the words:—
§ "If, on the application of the society, the town council still refuse or, in the opinion of the board, unduly delay to grant authority as aforesaid, such authority may forthwith be granted by the board."—[Mr. Ponsonby.]
§ Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
§ Bill, as amended, reported, to be considered to-morrow (Wednesday).