HC Deb 07 June 1921 vol 142 c1692

May I say I abstained from opposing the Second Reading of the Liverpool Corporation Bill to-day although I had strong objections to many of its provisions with regard to the amalgamation of Poor Law unions, the practical extinction of the admirable body of Select Vestries in Liverpool, the extension of boundaries and other provisions of the Bill which I thought would have led to an increased burden upon the taxpayers and ratepayers of Liverpool, and in abstaining from that opposition on the ground that they were Committee points I was acting in accordance with your ruling and recommendation on a previous Bill.


There is no doubt it is the usual practice that matters of that kind should be decided by those who hear the evidence for and against.