Clause 29. —(APPOINTMENTS OUTSIDE LONDON.) (Hansard, 7 December 1949)

§ Mr. Collins
I beg to move, in page 29, line 14, at the end, to insert: and of any boroughs or urban districts comprised in a district referred to in paragraph (d) of this subsection.

§ The Deputy-Chairman (Mr. Bowles)
This and the next four Amendments in page 29, standing in the names of the hon. Members for Taunton (Mr. Collins) and Banbury (Mr. Dodds-Parker) might conveniently be discussed together.

§ Mr. Collins
This and the next five Amendments, which hang together, have as their object the putting back of an arrangement which was in the Bill originally, whereby the non-county boroughs and urban districts could join together in applying for the appointment of a stipendiary. I understand that when the Bill was in another place an arrangement was made whereby the counties or parts of a county were given that right, and that involved the loss of the right to the non-county boroughs and urban districts. I hope that my right hon. Friend will see his way to accept these Amendments so that the right can be restored.
It will be obvious, I am sure, that there must be cases where a number of non-county boroughs and urban districts would find it desirable, and certainly within their financial means, to get together and make a petition for the appointment of a stipendiary, and it seems quite reasonable therefore to ask that such action should be allowed, that the appropriate words should be added to paragraph (b) of subsection (1) and that the addition of a paragraph (d) should be made to subsection (1). I do not know whether this point was overlooked in another place in making the 2001 alteration favouring the counties. I do not wish to elaborate the point because I think it is quite obvious.

§ Mr. Ede
I think that my hon. Friend's series of Amendments would be defective certainly in one respect, because there is the serious position that he would allow two urban districts to apply for a stipendiary, but not for one urban district to do so. I cannot help feeling that that would be an anomaly which would make it very difficult to apply. After all, we are trying to get the administration of justice on as broad lines as possible and I think that the county rather than the urban district is the proper body to put forward these petitions. After all, the salary of the stipendiary will be a charge on the county rate and not on the district rate, and it is quite clear, therefore, that the power of initiation should rest with the county magistrates' committee.
I go further than that. I think we have to face the fact that it may well be desired to include with an urban district or a non-county borough some adjoining rural parishes which are most appropriately served through the non-county borough or urban district which is the real core and centre of the area. Do not let us forget that in a good many mining areas, for instance, what is called a mining village and is a rural parish is, in fact, a town with a substantial population. I cannot help thinking that the proposal in the Bill is a thoroughly workable one which conforms with the new idea for the set-up on a wider basis of the administration of justice. I hope my hon. Friend will not feel it necessary to press these Amendments.

§ Mr. Collins
May I ask a question? We have had regard to the fact that a borough with a separate commission of the peace already has the right to apply for a stipendiary under paragraph (a), and under paragraph (c) two or more areas are provided for, which appears to be the kind of case which the right hon. Gentleman has described, but the case of a non-county borough and one or more urban districts which might join together is not necessarily provided for in the Bill. Does he not think, therefore, that it might be wise to provide at this stage for such a union?

§ Mr. Ede
No; the two boroughs would be part of a county.

§ Mr. Collins
That is the interpretation?

§ Mr. Ede
Yes.

§ Mr. Dodds-Parker
I should like to support what the hon. Member for Taunton (Mr. Collins) was saying and to take up one or two points in what the Home Secretary said. This seems to me to be another crack at the non-county boroughs and their autonomy. As the hon. Member for Taunton has pointed out, when this Bill was introduced in another place this Clause stood as we now proposed that it should. It was in another place that it was amended to read as it now does, and, though I should be the last to criticise another place for improving a Bill, I myself do not see, from what the Home Secretary said, the reason why non-county boroughs and urban districts should not have the right of petitioning for stipendiary magistrates. He said that the charge would fall on the county and not on the petitioning council, but subsection (5) says: The salary of a stipendiary magistrate appointed under this section shall be paid by the council or councils on whose petition he was appointed. I ask the Home Secretary to look at this very carefully before the Report stage to see whether he cannot amend the Clause to make non-county boroughs feel that they are not to have more of their powers taken away.

§ Mr. Collins
In view of the explanation given by my right hon. Friend, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

§ Mr. Marlowe
On a point of Order. Are you not calling, Mr. Bowles, the Amendment in my name, in page 29, line 43, to leave out from "paid," to the end of the subsection, and to insert "out of moneys provided by Parliament"?

§ The Deputy-Chairman
It is out of Order. It is beyond the scope of the Money Resolution.

§ Mr. Marlowe
May I detain the Committee for a moment on this Clause with regard to the payment of stipendiaries? I do not know whether it is in Order for me on this Clause to refer to the payment 2003 of stipendiaries out of moneys provided by Parliament.

§ The Deputy-Chairman
No. That is why the hon. and learned Gentleman's Amendment was out of Order. If he referred to moneys provided by the Secretary of State, it might be in Order, but it is not in Order to refer to moneys provided by Parliament.

§ Mr. Marlowe
I would put it this way. There is considerable concern because it is considered undesirable that stipendiaries should be paid by the local authorities. I hope that at some time this matter will be given consideration. Certainly in some of the smaller towns it does lead to jobbery and to lobbying for appointments, and it also leads to the position that stipendiary magistrates become the servants of the local authorities. One knows only too well how sometimes in other countries local politics enter a good deal into the appointments to the judicial bench, and I think it would be very undesirable if any such system began to obtain a foothold here. As we know, there is no such tendency in this country as yet; but it is a point that needs to be watched, and I hope that the Home Office will from time to time, whenever this question of stipendiary magistrates' appointments is being considered, bear in mind the risk that one does run if one leaves this matter to the local authorities, so that the local magistrate in fact becomes a servant of the local authority, and, therefore, may be influenced in the discharge of his duties by the interest of the local authority.
That was the point which I had in mind in my Amendment which has not been selected. It was directed towards endeavouring to remove the stipendiary magistrates from the service of the local authorities, and to provide that their salaries should be paid out of some other source, which would remove any temptation for a stipendiary to regard himself as being influenced by the local authority.

§ The Attorney-General
The hon. and learned Gentleman realises that stipendiary magistrates are not appointed by the local authorities, and that they are appointed by His Majesty?

§ Mr. Marlowe
But they are to be paid by them.

§ The Attorney-General
Paid out of local funds, but their appointment is solely in the hands of the Crown on the recommendation now of the Lord Chancellor, and the fact that their salaries happen to come out of local funds rather than out of national funds ought not to make them any more the servants of the local authorities. I really cannot see that the source of their salary should make any difference in regard to their independence of the local authorities.

§ Mr. Marlowe
The right hon. and learned Gentleman will realise that there may be cases where it is desirable to have a stipendiary magistrate but one will not be appointed because his salary has to be paid by the local authority. A local authority trying to save money may not cause a stipendiary magistrate to be appointed. Although he is appointed by the Lord Chancellor, the recommendation for the appointment arises locally, and no area will have a stipendiary magistrate unless it asks for it.

§ The Attorney-General
No new area.

§ Mr. Marlowe
Yes.