§
Lords Amendment: No. 1, in page 1, line 8, at beginning insert:
For the administration of local government on and after 1st April 1974
§ Mr. Graham PageI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. E. L. Mallalieu)With this Amendment it is suggested that we should consider also Lords Amendment No. 72.
§ Mr. PageThese are purely drafting Amendments to say in the first few words of Part I what is the purpose of the whole exercise and, in particular, the purpose of the new areas defined in Clause 1 for England and Clause 20 for Wales.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§
Lords Amendment: No. 2, in page 2, in line 8, after "Act" insert:
and to any provision corresponding to that Part made by an order under section 243 below
§ Mr. Graham PageI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this Amendment it will be convenient to discuss at the same time Lords Amendment No. 44.
§ Mr. PageWhere a parish is divided under the Bill—that is, between two counties or metropolitan districts—provision is made in Part IV of Schedule 1 for the future parish government of the divided area. Some parishes may be divided, not in the Bill itself, but in the order establishing the non-metropolitan districts, and consequential orders under Clause 243 will be needed to do for those parishes what Part IV of Schedule 1 does for parishes divided in the Bill itself. The first Amendment allows this to be done and the second Amendment is consequential.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§
Lords Amendment: No. 3, in page 2, line 15, leave out from "the" to end of line 17 and insert:
boundaries of which are determined by reference to those of existing boroughs and urban districts and also, in cases where the areas of such boroughs and urban districts are divided by or under this section between two or more new districts, by reference to the boundaries of the new districts.
§ Mr. Graham PageI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
§ Mr. Deputy SpeakerWith this Amendment I suggest that the House should consider also Lords Amendments Nos. 31 to 33, Nos. 55 to 57, and Nos. 65 to 69.
§ Mr. PageThis Amendment has much more meat in it than those with which we have already dealt. The Bill provides for successor parishes to be established in certain small boroughs and urban districts. They will be selected on the advice of the Local Government Boundary Commission for England. The successor parish must be coterminous with the present borough or urban district if it is to come into effect on 1st April, 1974. Otherwise, because of the difficulty of deciding the boundaries in the time, it will have to wait until after 1st April, 1974, when it can be set up under the permanent machinery being established under Part IV of the Bill.
There is, however, a special case in a handful of small boroughs and urban districts which have been divided between metropolitan districts. Similar cases could arise on the establishment of the patent of non-metropolitan districts by order after recommendation from the Boundary Commission.
These Amendments adapt the general provisions for successor parishes so as to cover also this handful of cases in which existing small boroughs and urban districts are being divided either in the Bill itself or under an order following on a recommendation of the Boundary Commission in relation to the non-metropolitan districts.
§ Mr. BlenkinsopThis is a case in point where it is difficult for us to follow the whole range of Amendments. We take the point that this is meant to cover largely the case where parishes are being established to take the place of the previously existing authority in county areas, but we had discussions about the possibility of extending the provision to enable parishes to be established in urban communities, although they would not take up the whole of the boundary of those urban communities. I refer to the desirability of establishing urban parishes within existing towns.
One at least of the Amendments—on my way to the Chamber I thought that I detected it, but I am not sure now that 829 I did—seemed to allow this procedure to occur. I appreciate the right hon. Gentleman's point about the limited number of authorities, but I thought that it could be interpreted rather more widely.
As I was one of those who urged that there should be an opportunity for the establishment of urban parishes within existing urban communities, even though the new parish would not be coterminous with the previous borough or urban districts, I am very concerned to know whether the possibility which I thought I had detected is true or false. I fear from what the Minister has said that my hopes that their Lordships have kindly given something which we in this House had urged will prove to be unfounded. It will greatly affect our attitude to certain parts of this Bill in its future development if the right hon. Gentleman could tell us that there are the possibilities for the development of such urban parishes.
§ Mr. Graham PageWith the leave of the House, I will seek to assure the hon. Member for South Shields (Mr. Blenkinsop) that what he desires—the urban parish which does not take up the whole of the urban district—can come into operation after 1st April, 1974, on the recommendation of the Boundary Commission, but purely from the point of view of the difficulty of the work of fixing the boundaries, we are not asking the Boundary Commission until after 1st April, 1974. These Amendments deal only with those parishes which emerge from the Bill or from an Order made under it.
§ Question put and agreed to.
§
Lords Amendment: No. 4, in page 2, line 30, leave out "including one" and insert:
and the corporation of a borough included".
§ 5.0 p.m.
§ Mr. Graham PageI beg to move, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said Amendment.
This drafting Amendment simply expands a phrase which does not necessarily affect the continuation of the rural boroughs as parishes.
§ Question put and agreed to.