§ 1. Scheme by Local Authority.
§ Clause 2 (Application of Act to certain districts and description of local authority).
§ THE DUKE OF SOMERSETsaid, that under this part of the Bill the Metropolitan Board of Works or any Local Authority would have authority to draw up any number of schemes, in the carrying out of which they might levy any amount of rates and exercise almost unlimited borrowing powers, and include them all in one improvement scheme, and yet the ratepayers would have no locus standi before the Confirming Authority in opposition to those schemes. The only parties who could be heard would be those whose properties were affected. He suggested also that much inconvenience might be caused to the poorer classes if too large a number of houses were demolished at the same time.
§ EARL BEAUCHAMPpointed out that Clause 6 would effectually prevent any such excess on the part of the Metropolitan Board of Works or any other Local Authority. The clause directed that the Local Authority, after due notice to the parties interested, should present a Petition in the case of the Metropolis to the Home Secretary—in the case of an urban district to the Local Government Board. These, who were termed the Confirming Authority, were to make local inquiries, and were, when satisfied, to make a Provisional Order; and this Provisional Order was of no validity until confirmed by an Act of Parliament. Therefore he (Earl Beauchamp) did not think there was ground for the apprehension of the noble Duke. Neither did he think there was good ground for anticipating that any large number of the poorer classes would be unhoused by the demolition of too large a number of houses at the same time. It was not to be supposed that a large number of schemes would be projected at the same time—and the work of improvement would proceed gradually. Experience in Edinburgh and Glasgow showed that in almost every case the persons displaced by demolition were able to obtain better accommodation at not much larger rent.
LORD NAPIER AND ETTRICKreminded their Lordships that the Metro- 1342 politan Board of Works was elected by the vestries, who were elected by the ratepayers. There would be no difficulty in providing dwellings for the people displaced by improvements under the Bill.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 3 (Local Authority on being satisfied by official representation of the unhealthiness of district to make scheme for its improvement) agreed to.
§ Clause 4 (Official representation by whom to be made).
LORD MONTEAGLE OF BRANDONproposed an Amendment to insert words requiring Registrars, when required by Vestries or District Boards, to transmit a return of particulars concerning deaths.
§ THE DUKE OF RICHMONDsaid, the Amendment would be more appropriate in a Registration Bill.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ Clause 5 (Requisites of improvement scheme of local authority).
§ THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURYdesired to express his opinion that if the demolition of condemned dwellings was proceeded with gradually, it would cause no serious inconvenience to the poorer classes even for the time, and would confer great and lasting benefit upon these classes. He must, however, say that the eases of Edinburgh and Glasgow were not cases in point. In those cities should the working people flowed over into the suburbs, they would have, even then, only a short distance between them and their places of work, whatever the district in which they went to live. But in London it was altogether different, and if in this metropolis, so remote in its extent, and its suburbs so vast, you demolished a large number of houses in a given locality at the same time, the working men and women who had lived in them would be obliged to migrate to other districts at very considerable distances. The result would be that they must leave the employment at which they had been engaged and seek a new connection in the neighbourhood of their new homes. Such an inconvenience would be obviated if the local authority only demolished 15 or 20, or 30 houses at a time. He hoped, therefore, the Government authorities to whom the powers of con- 1343 ferring were entrusted, would take care to check sudden and wholesale removals by large demolitions, and encourage gradual displacements, so that the people disturbed might have a fair opportunity of finding new residences. Such wholesale displacements as had taken place in Westminster had inflicted great hardships by driving away the working people from the places of their employment. These, however, were points of detail, and he felt satisfied that the Bill would work much good if the local authorities, while anxiously availing themselves of its provisions, carried out their scheme by a discreet and gradual method.
§ LORD ABERDAREsaid, there was another aspect of the question—he thought it a wise and charitable thing to break up "rookeries," and places of like character, where poor people were massed together in contempt of all health and decency. In Glasgow 26,000 dwelling-places were constructed in lieu of 500 demolished.
EARL BAUCHAMPthought that if only the sites were obtained, the new buildings would be sure to be erected.
§ Clause agreed to.
§ 2. Confirmation of Scheme.
§ Clause 6 (Improvement scheme by provisional order to be confirmed by notices) agreed to.
§ Clause 7 (Costs to be awarded in certain cases) agreed to.
§ Clause 8 (Inquiry on refusal of local authority to make an improvement scheme).
LORD NAPIER AND ETTRICKsaid, he had an Amendment to propose, the object of which was to put on the same footing all parties affected by the Bill; to bring the provisions of the Bill in harmony with existing Acts and projected Acts of similar character; and to compel the Local Authorities to do their duty under the Bill. The Bill as it stood was partly permissive and partly compulsory. It was permissive as far as the Local Authorities, it was compulsory so far as the interests of property were concerned. He did not doubt that the owners of property would be found ready to make the sacrifices required of them for the public good, but in equity a similar sacrifice should be demanded of the Local Authorities. 1344 By the Sanitary Acts the Local Government Board could, if they thought fit, order a scheme to be carried out by the local authority; and if the latter refused to comply, the Board sent an officer down to impose a rate on the recalcitrant locality, and enforce the improvement. The Rivers Pollution Bill now before their Lordships would also give a veto to the Local Government Board. The compulsory power had reference also to moral and educational improvement, for the Education Department possessed a power to order the erection of a sufficient number of schools. A compulsory power vested in the Confirming Authority would be of use to the Local Authorities themselves. They were the municipal bodies, and no doubt they would be willing to do their duty as well as they could do it under present circumstances; but they were selected by the ratepayers, and it was only natural to suppose that in some cases at least they might not have sufficient firmness to carry out an improvement if the effect would be to imperil their re-election. But if they could tell the ratepayers that there was a compulsory power behind the municipality which would come down upon it if it did not do the work, that would put them in a much better position with their constituents. He begged to move to add at the end of the clause this Proviso:—
And in case the report thus rendered shall substantiate the official representation, or show that an improvement scheme is necessary, it shall he open to the confirming authority to communicate such report to the local authority and summon the local authority to present an improvement scheme within a specified period; and should the local authority fail to present the required scheme it shall be open to the confirming authority, being satisfied of the sufficiency of the resources of the local authority, to frame an improvement scheme conformable to the provisions of Clause 5 of the present Act, and to communicate the same to the local authority; and it shall be the duty of that authority to proceed with such scheme under the provisions of Clause 6 of the present Act in all respects as if such scheme were a complete improvement scheme freely adopted by the local authority; and in case the confirming authority shall see fit to submit to Parliament a confirming Act authorizing the execution of an improvement scheme framed under those conditions, copy shall be furnished to Parliament of all correspondence which has passed between the local authority and the confirming authority in connection with such scheme."—(The Lord Napier and Ettrick.)
§ EARL BEAUCHAMPsaid, he could not accept the Amendment. The evils 1345 the Bill intended to remove were evils of a particular kind, and, therefore, the powers to be given must necessarily differ from those given in cases that were not analogous. The evils to be dealt with were local, and the improvements under the Bill must be carried out by persons on the spot, and with the concurrence of the locality. Those improvements were not on all fours with the work provided for in the Sanitary Acts. In the case of the Pollution of Rivers the powers given were to prevent things being done, not to enforce the doing them. Some Acts must be in their nature permissive—such as the Libraries Act; and he found that in a report made by the Charity Organization Committee in 1873 it was recommended that the Metropolitan Board of Works and the Corporation of the City should be "armed with the powers" which this Bill would confer, and "urged to use them;" but there was not one word in the report recommending the compulsory principle now advocated by the noble Lord, and yet the report itself was signed "Napier and Ettrick, Chairman."
§ LORD ABERDAREsaid, that the compulsory powers given to the Home Office, in the case of sewage and water supply, by the Act of 1866, had been included in the Act in consequence of the reports made by Government Inspectors. Only in three or four instances had the Department undertaken to carry out works itself; and in those instances the process had been found a troublesome one, owing to the Home Office having to send down its own engineers and working staff. It would be impossible to do this in the case of a large number of schemes projected from time to time with the view of improving the dwellings of artizans.
LORD NAPIER AND ETTRICKsaid, he did not propose to empower the Confirming Authority to execute the works itself.
§ LORD ABERDAREknew that the noble Lord did not make that proposition; but unless that was done, how could security be taken that effect would be given to his Amendment? If the Confirming Authority were not invested with the authority to execute the works itself in case the Local Authority refused, how could it compel the latter to act? He did not think it would be 1346 necessary to compel the Local Authorities formed under this Bill to discharge their duties; but if it should appear that they failed to do so, it was necessary that the Secretary of State or Local Government Board should have power to direct an inquiry; but it was impossible to give power to the Secretary of State to do the work when a hostile Board refused to do it. The only effectual mode was to bring public opinion to bear, and this the Bill would do, for when the evil was declared and the remedy provided, it was not likely the inhabitants would elect persons not to do it. It would be impossible, and if it were possible it would be mischievous, to interfere with the action of the Local Authorities in respect of improvements such as those contemplated in the Bill.
§ EARL FORTESCUEconcurred in the disadvantages and difficulties in carrying on such works through the Central Authority, but it might be very useful for the Home Secretary to have authority to do so where the local bodies refused to comply. Such, for instance, as in the case of exceptional mortality arising from the disgraceful condition of the dwellings in any particular locality.
§ EARL BEAUCHAMPbelieved that local public bodies would be induced by their public spirit and the experience of other places to avail themselves of the provisions of the Bill without being compelled to do so by the Central Authority. Should it happen hereafter that it was necessary compulsory powers should be given to the Central Authority, application might then be made to Parliament to confer 'such powers as might be thought expedient.
§ EARL FORTESCUEsaid, he did not distrust the Local Authorities generally, but thought that provision should be made for the few cases in which corporations might obstinately refuse to carry the Bill into operation.
§ Clause agreed to, with Amendments.
§ Clause 10 (Completion of scheme on failure of local authority) agreed to.
§ Clause 11 (Notice to occupiers by placards) agreed to.
§ Clause 12 (Power of confirming authority to modify authorized scheme).
§ THE DUKE OF SOMERSETexpressed his opinion that the power of the Confirming Authority to allow the Local Authority to modify any part of an improve- 1347 ment scheme authorized by the Confirming Act which it might appear inexpedient to carry into execution in accordance with such Act was too large. It was, in fact, a mode of superseding the authority of Parliament which appeared to be objectionable.
§ EARL BEAUCHAMPsaid, that as in many cases it would probably take several years to carry out the schemes completely, it might become necessary that the schemes should be varied or modified, and it was better that such modification should be effected with the sanction of the Central Authority rather than that the local bodies should be forced to apply to Parliament for the purpose.
§ LORD ABERDAREsuggested that some limitation might be usefully placed upon the action of the Central Authority in the exercise of the power in question.
§ EARL BEAUCHAMPsaid, he would consider the matter, and would propose some modification of the clause on the Report.
§ Clause agreed to.