HC Deb 14 November 1933 vol 281 cc800-1

6.7 p.m.

Sir GERALD HURST

I beg to move, in page 39, line 27, to leave out the word "thirty" and to insert instead thereof he word "fourteen."

This Amendment raises a short point, but it is one of principle. The purpose is to cut down the length of time and therefore the expense of the casual election in the case of county and borough councils. In the Schedule, page 194, the periods for county council elections and borough council elections are stated as 20 and 12 days, respectively. Under this Clause no less than 30 days are given or what might be described as an election campaign in the case of casual vacancies. Under the existing law, I understand, the period is 14 days. To extend that period to 30 days seems altogether unreasonable. It may be said hat holidays intervene, but there is a provision in Part I of the Second schedule for excluding public holidays or days appointed for public thanksgiving or mourning from the calculation of the periods, and that provision would meet the point. One has to deal here with the normal case, and my contention is that 14 days for such an election is ample time. It is everyone's desire to get the best men possible elected. Long elections mean more expense, and that must act as a deterrent. Fourteen days is quite enough from every point of view. They provide enough adulation and self- advertisement for anyone, and if the candidate has an inferiority complex 14 days' derision and hatred will be enough for him too.

6.9 p.m.

Mr. HACKING

As my hon. and learned Friend has correctly stated, this Clause deals with casual vacancies in county boroughs and in districts, but his statement of the existing law was not quite correct. The law says that after a vacancy has been declared, and before the date of the election, 14 days must elapse in the cases of county and borough councils, but one month must elapse in connection with district council elections. The effect of the Amendment would be to reduce from 30 to 14 days the period in district council elections. The Royal Commission definitely recommended four weeks as the period, and the Chelmsford Committee recommended 30 days. Both the Commission and the Committee heard much evidence on the matter. They believed that 14 days was too short a period, and that in fact it caused a number of void elections owing to the difficulty of finding candidates in such a short time. I submit that we would be well advised in accepting the recommendations of the Chelmsford Committee.

Amendment negatived.

Clauses 68 to 71 ordered to stand part of the Bill.