PROVISIONAL ORDERS—LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOARD PROVISIONAL ORDERS (BIRMINGHAM, &c.) BILL. (Hansard, 18 July 1876)

§ LORD REDESDALE
desired to point out that a very important question was being raised by the great extent to which the system of Provisional Orders was now carried. When exercised with prudence and discretion, the powers conferred by Provisional Orders were no doubt useful and advantageous, and it was also necessary that in certain cases the Local Government Board should be able to set aside the provisions of an Act of Parliament in the matter of local improvements. But at the same time it was not to be forgotten that these powers were liable to abuse, and that they might open the door to an enormous amount of jobbery. In particular it was desirable that in the case of Bills for local improvements there should be a watchful jealousy and discretion observed in order to prevent burdens being imposed by means of borrowing powers for the bearing and repayment of which by the ratepayers no adequate provision was made. He was of opinion that the money raised for local improvements by borrowing should only be raised where full and adequate provisions were inserted in the Bill, not only for the payment of the stipulated interest, but also for the creation of a sinking fund for the repayment of the principal within a reasonable period. Such a provision he thought was necessary for the protection of the ratepayers as well as the creditors. He was extremely reluctant to interpose any difficulty to the progress of this particular Bill. With regard to such a place as Birmingham, there could be no charge or suspicion of jobbing; but let them take the case of a small borough with a debt of, say, £100,000, to be paid off in 30 years. The sum required 1520 annually in such a case would be not inconsiderable, and it was surely a dangerous power for the Local Government Board to possess, to be able to relieve the rates by extending the period for the extinction of the debt to 100 years. In an Act of 1851 it was provided that no application should be made to Parliament by a Town Council for power to raise money without first calling a meeting of the ratepayers, and receiving their sanction to the proceeding; but it was proposed in this case to set aside that provision for the protection of the ratepayers—rather a strong thing to be done by a Provisional Order. The question with regard to Provisional Orders was becoming one of very great importance. He did not mean to question the right of the Local Government Board to exercise the powers entrusted to them, but he could not help calling attention to the extent to which borrowing power had already been granted. There were no fewer than 165 places affected by such Bills as that now before their Lordships, and under these circumstances he hoped the Local Government Board would be careful in sanctioning these Bills, and in providing a sufficient guarantee for payment of interest and principal under fair and reasonable arrangements to the ratepayers.

§ LORD ABERDARE
said, he thought the noble Lord ought not to have raised this question without giving notice to the Department concerned. He would, however, point out that the power exercised by the Local Government Board in respect of Provisional Orders was in aid of the local authority and for local purposes, and that consequently the main point was to secure that the parties locally interested should be duly consulted, and their consent obtained before any burden was placed upon them.

THE EARL OF JERSEY
said, that the reason why the section of the Act of 1851 requiring the consent of the ratepayers to an application to Parliament by a Town Council was set aside by a Provisional Order, was that some doubt existed whether Town Councils were under the provisions of the Act of 1871 or under the Borough Funds Act of 1872, and the Corporation of Birmingham preferred to come under the latter. The Bill proposed to give borrowing powers to the Corporation of Birmingham to make extensive improvements 1521 by the demolition of crowded and unhealthy areas, and the construction of improved dwellings for artizans, with properly ventilated, lighted, and drained streets. That involved a large expenditure, and the Corporation were anxious that the present ratepayers should not be called upon to pay more than their fair share of the cost of making these improvements. The Bill gave the power of distributing the cost and interest fairly with reference to the benefits which the improvements would confer upon future residents in such dwellings, and provided at the same time a sufficient security for repayment.

§ THE DUKE OF SOMERSET
thought that their Lordships ought to feel very much obliged to the noble Chairman of Committees for calling their attention to this subject. He would suggest that there should be a Standing Committee of the House to whom all these Provisional Order Bills should be referred; that Committee would, in fact, greatly assist the Local Government Board. At present the House had no means of knowing whether the Bills contained improper provisions or not; and, though he did not desire to impute any blame to the Local Government Department, yet clauses slipped into these Bills, which were without doubt objectionable.

THE DUKE OF RICHMOND AND GORDON
believed that legislation by means of Provisional Orders was a very good system, saving a great amount of expense in Private Bill legislation. It further secured careful investigation, for the practice was to institute a local inquiry by the Board before a Confirmation Bill was allowed to be introduced. In his opinion, the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board had not exceeded in this case the powers with which he was entrusted, and had used them with discretion. The town of Birmingham had laid out large sums in local improvements, and that was a sufficient reason why a provision for the extension of time for repayment, such as was contemplated by this Bill, should be sanctioned. He did not think the Standing Committee suggested by the noble Duke (the Duke of Somerset) would work well; but thought the local inquiry to which he had just now alluded should be preceded by local advertizement so as to apprise the ratepayers of what was intended to be done, 1522 so that if they felt any interest in the matter they might attend the public inquiry and state their views.

§ THE EARL OF HARROWBY
considered that the suggestion of the noble Duke (the Duke of Somerset) that there should be a Standing Committee a very good one. That Committee would see that the rules laid down by Parliament had been complied with. They should remember that as regarded Private Bills they had such a Committee, and that that was a security that nothing improper passed through Parliament.

§ LORD WINMARLEIGH
, said there could be no doubt that these Provisional Orders were a great saving of expense to the parties promoting them; but what was required was that more notice should be given to the localities of what was going on—there should be some means for calling the attention of the inhabitants to the principal points in the proposed Bill. But he would be sorry to oppose this system of legislation.

§ LORD REDESDALE
said, he was far from objecting to the system of Provisional Orders, but the powers conferred on the Local Government Board ought to be exercised with very great discretion. The period of the Session at which these Bills were introduced was objectionable, as it was quite impossible to properly consider the clauses. During this Session there had been brought in 120 Provisional Order Bills, and only 42 of them were introduced before the month of June. But Private Bills had to be deposited in the month of December in order that they might be properly examined; thus they were before the public and the House a sufficient time to enable all parties to investigate them. He would suggest that their Lordships should lay down a rule that these Provisional Order Bills should not be brought in later than the month of April or May, so that there might be time to look into them.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
said, there were two evils to meet—that of not sufficient notice to the parties, and that of want of time for examining these Bills. He certainly thought that sufficient notice was not given to the parties whose property was affected by these Orders, and that their Standing Orders should provide that some adequate notice should be given before the second reading of these Provisional Orders was 1523 taken to the persons who were locally interested in them. He desired to say that it was the business of the Opposition to read these Bills. When he was in Opposition he considered it his duty to read all Bills; and if noble Lords opposite neglected that function they were not performing the constitutional functions of an Opposition.