§ Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
§ 8.2 p.m.
§ Mr. Martin Lindsay (Solihull)Could the Minister of Health elucidate for us the position of urban districts which wish to apply for a Charter of incorporation as municipal boroughs. This question was put on Second Reading by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Enfield (Mr. Ernest Davies). I do not intend to make the hon. Member's speech over again, because the position of these authorities is quite well known to the Ministry. Nor is it necessary for me to expound upon the reasons why large urban districts want very properly to increase their status.
1318 The Parliamentary Secretary, in introducing this Bill, told us that on the dissolution of the Boundary Commission we returned to the status quo as far as changes in status of local authorities are concerned. I venture to think that this is not quite correct in the cases to which I am referring because, if it were so, reversion to the 1933 Act would mean that urban district councils could petition to the King in Council for a grant of in-corporation and in suitable cases, of course, the petition would be granted. Since this Act of 1933, however, the position appears to have changed, because the Lord President of the Council said in the House on 11th July this year, in answer to a Parliamentary Question, that only in very exceptional circumstances would His Majesty be advised to grant a petition. What these local authorities want to know is, what are the exceptional circumstances? I hope the Minister may think fit to take us into his confidence and inform us, so that such urban districts as Uxbridge, Enfield, Rhondda and Solihull will know where they stand.
§ The Deputy-Chairman (Mr. Bowles)The Question is, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
§ Lieut.-Colonel Elliot (Scottish Universities)On a point of Order. We would hope that the Minister would reply to the invitation of my hon. Friend the Member for Solihull (Mr. M. Lindsay).
§ The Deputy-ChairmanI did not know whether there was to be a reply, and I was not able to follow how the hon. Gentleman's argument applied here.
§ The Minister of Health (Mr. Aneurin Bevan)I do not want to appear discourteous, but I cannot connect this request and this Clause. The incorporation of an urban district is not involved in the repeal of the Boundary Commission Act. If the hon. Gentleman wants me to make a general statement on the subject, and I have the permission of the House, I would say that my view is roughly the view of my right hon. Friend the Lord President of the Council—that whilst a review of local government is under the active consideration of the Government, it would be undesirable for any important changes to take place in the status of local authorities. That would apply to incorporation just as much as to the other authorities who want to become county 1319 boroughs. If it be the correct thing—and I believe it is—that in the meantime we ought not to alter the status of non-county boroughs we should not surely alter the status of urban district councils.
§ The Deputy-ChairmanI do not think that this subject comes within this Clause at all.
§ Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.
§ The Deputy-ChairmanThe new Clause—(Compensation to officers and servants)—standing on the Order Paper in the name of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for the Scottish Universities (Lieut.-Colonel Elliot) and some of his colleagues is not in Order.
§ Lieut.-Colonel ElliotWe naturally accept your Ruling, Mr. Bowles, but I trust it will be possible for the Minister on Third Reading to make some statement a little more categorical than the rather general statement which he made on the Financial Resolution. Of course, we did not press him at the time, because we were anxious not to delay the further stages of the Bill, but perhaps the Minister will think it over again between now and that stage of the Bill.