BILL PRESENTED. FIRST READING. (Hansard, 8 May 1884)

THE EARL OF DALHOUSIE
, in rising, according to Notice, to present a Bill for the reform of the Local Government of Scotland, said: My Lords, the House will not be surprised that Her Majesty's Government should again this year introduce a measure dealing with the Government of Scotland. Not to go further back in the history of this question than the Bill of last year, I may remind your Lordships that, at the end of last Session, a Bill dealing with the Local Government of Scotland passed through the House of Commons, with the support and approval of the great majority of the Scottish Members of Parliament, and came up to your Lordships' House. Your Lordships saw fit to reject that Bill on the second reading; but I may remind your Lordships that, with scarcely an exception, all the speeches that were made on both sides of the House agreed upon this—that, however faulty the measure might be, nevertheless some measure of the kind was urgently needed, and ought to be passed. The Bill of last year, so far as I could understand the facts, was thrown out, partly on the ground of detail, but partly because, as observed by the noble Marquess opposite (the Marquess of Salisbury), there was not time then to consider the Bill, but partly, also, on the ground that the Scottish people were not sufficiently urgent in pressing for the Bill. Well, now, as regards the desire of the Scottish people to have a Bill of this kind, I need only refer to the great public meeting held at Edinburgh at the beginning of this year—a meeting presided over by the noble Marquess (the Marquess of Lothian), and at which my noble Friend opposite (Lord Balfour) and several other noble Lords attended and spoke. I also attended that meeting; but I attended it only as a looker-on, and chiefly in the hope of the profit and instruction that I expected to derive from the speech of the noble Marquess. Although I was certainly au interested spectator in one sense of the word, I was in another a perfectly impartial one, and I can only 1665 assure your Lordships that I was very greatly impressed by the magnitude and the character of that great assembly. In the opinion of many whose judgments are much more worth having than mine, such a meeting has rarely, if ever, taken place either in Scotland or any other country of the world. There were representatives of every class, representatives of every section of the nation, representatives of every shade of opinion, political and religious. The discussion lasted for some three hours, and I think there were some 30 or 40 speeches; and, so far as I recollect, there was not one single discordant note from beginning to end. After that, I think it would be impossible for any opponent of this measure to say that the Scottish people, as a nation, do not strongly and urgently require a Bill of this nature. The Government have also been anxious to meet the wishes and criticism of the noble Marquess opposite. They have, therefore, introduced this measure in the House of Lords at this early period of the Session; and though, of course, it is very possible that the ingenuity of the noble Marquess in discovering reasons for the rejection of measures proposed by Her Majesty's Government may not be baffled by this simple precaution, still, the noble Marquess will admit that, if this Bill is to follow the fate of the Bill of last year, it must be on some other ground than that of want of time. Then, as to the details urged by my noble Friend opposite (Lord Balfour), the Government have taken pains also to meet the objections which he raised last year, and I hope that when he sees this measure he will be of opinion that they have not been unsuccessful in their attempt. I ought to say that, in the Notice that stands on the Paper in my name, there is an error in the title of this Bill. Instead of "A Bill for the Reform of the Local Government of Scotland," it ought to be called "A Bill for appointing a Secretary for Scotland." This Bill appoints a Secretary for Scotland—not of a Scottish Local Board—who is to hold Office during Her Majesty's pleasure, and who is to have a permanent Assistant Secretary. The Secretary for Scotland, if he is not a Member of your Lordships' House, must, at all events, be a person eligible for a seat in the House of Commons; and he will be in this position— 1666 that if he be a Member of Parliament, on acceptance of the Office he will be required to vacate his seat, and seek reelection at the hands of his constituents. This Bill also transfers to the Secretary for Scotland all the powers and duties which are vested in the Secretary of State in relation to the Universities of Scotland; also, all rights of patronage relating to offices and appointments in Scotland which are vested in the Secretary of State; also, all powers and duties vested in the Secretary of State by certain Amendments specified in the Schedule. I will not go through the Schedule; because I think I should have an undue advantage over your Lordships in doing so, and some difficulty in making your Lordships understand my meaning if I attempted it. This Bill reserves to the Lord Advocate all the rights, powers, and privileges which he has hitherto enjoyed. The difference between the Bill and the Bill of last year, to put it very shortly, is this—that the authority to be constituted is that of a Secretary, and not that of a Local Board. Provision is made in this Bill, as in the Bill of last year, for the appointment of an Assistant Secretary—a permanent officer—and the powers and duties of the Secretary of State for the Home Department in relation to the Universities were not in the Bill of last year, but will, by this Bill, be transferred to the Secretary for Scotland. The administration of the Education and Endowments Acts is also transferred from the Education Department to the Scottish Secretary. My Lords, to give you a sufficient description of all the alterations this Bill will make would require a great length of time, and could hardly be satisfactorily made until the measure is in your Lordships' hands. I will, therefore, defer that to a later stage of the Bill, and content myself by moving that it be now read a first time.

LORD BALFOUR
I do not desire to make any criticism of the measure which the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Dalhousie) has laid on the Table of your Lordships' House, for the simple reason that I have not been able from his explanation to really gauge the scope of the measure. I will not deny the 1667 necessity for the measure, and I am very glad indeed that he has introduced it at a much earlier period of the Session than was the case last year, and has, therefore, given us time to give it a fair and full consideration. I am glad to be able to corroborate almost entirely what he said in regard to the meeting which was held in Scotland, and I would add tbis—I do not think, between him and myself—in fact, between him and almost anyone who has spoken in public on this subject—that there is any difference in principle. This measure is obviously one the details of which require the most careful consideration; and I am quite certain that, if there is any point of difference, it will be on points of detail, such as, perhaps, can be best considered before a Select Committee, where arguments can be exchanged, and that without making sot speeches. I therefore would venture to suggest that, as we have plenty of time before us, some time should be given before the second reading is taken; or an engagement should be entered into by the Government that they will not oppose the reference of the Bill to a Select Committee of your Lordships' House. In saying that I would like to add this—that I do not propose this course with any intention of delaying or obstructing the progress of the measure, because I know that there is a strong feeling in favour of something of the kind in Scotland. But I am sure anyone who has held high Office will corroborate me, when I express my opinion that, in changing the Department which has to conduct Business, and the details of Business, it is most necessary to be very careful as to the way in which that is done. It would be, in my opinion, a great misfortune if there was a separation in the management of those affairs which are regulated by the same statutory authority for England and Scotland. The noble Earl did not say whether such things as the regulation of factories and mines was to he transferred to the new Office. Now, that was one of the principal objections I urged—that those things which are regulated by the same statutes for England and Scotland should not be transferred from the Home Office. I shall not, however, attempt to criticize the measure further at this stage, but shall confine myself to asking the Government whether they can now fix a 1668 day for the second reading, or to express an opinion as to the proposal I make for the reference of the Bill to a Select Committee.

§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY
I only wish to assure the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Dalhousie) that I am not in the least degree unfriendly to the object of this Bill. I should be very glad to see some such Bill passed, as I am convinced it is the wish of the people of Scotland; but, on the other hand, I concur with my noble Friend who has just spoken that the details should be carefully scrutinized, in order to avoid any inconvenience arising.

THE EARL OF GALLOWAY
The noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Dalhousie) stated that the Bill has come with an inexact title; but he did not say what the title was. He says there is to be a Secretary for Scotland. I presume he means a Secretary of State. As to the request of my noble Friend (Lord Balfour) that the second reading should be deferred for some time, I quite agree that that is desirable; but to ask Her Majesty's Government now to say that they commit themselves to refer the Bill to a Select Committee seems to me to be a strong demand. I think it would be better for us to see what the Bill is, and then, on the second reading, decide for ourselves whether it should go to a Select Committee or not.

THE EARL OF BELMORE
Perhaps I might ask whether the new Secretary is intended to be a Member of the Privy Council, like the Chief Secretary for Ireland?

THE EARL OF DALHOUSIE
I must defer giving an answer to the question just asked by the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Belmore). I am glad to be able to express agreement w7ith the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Galloway), that to ask, at this stage of the proceedings, that the Bill should be referred to a Select Committee is rather a strong request. I thought of putting down the second reading of the Bill for the 20th instant; but I do not know whether your Lordships would consider that too early a period. As to the question whether or not the Secretary for Scotland is to be a Secretary of State, I have emphatically to say that he will not be a Secretary of State, and it is not so intended he should be. The Secretaryship for Scotland will be a Secretaryship 1669 altogether inferior to that of a Secretary of State.