WORKING MEN'S DWELLINGS BILL [H.L.] (Hansard, 9 March 1897)

§ THE MARQUESS OF LONDONDERRY
moved the Second Reading of this Bill. He said they were very familiar with the Measure inasmuch as it had passed a Second Reading in another place on two occasions, and only in June last it passed through all stages in their Lordships' House, virtually without opposition. Under these circumstances he did not think he would be justified in trespassing upon their indulgence at any great length to-night. He reminded their Lordships that the Bill was of a purely permissive character, providing as it did that any local authority might, if they thought fit, make advances under the provisions of the Act to any workman for the purpose of buying the freehold or leasehold interest of the dwelling-house in which he resided or intended to reside. In the Bill there were ample provisions for the safeguarding of the interests of the ratepayers. The Bill was submitted in the very form in which it emerged from their Lordships' House last year, and, therefore, he did not think they would raise any objection to the Second Reading today. He had taken considerable interest in this question, and he found that in the North of England, where he resided, there was a great desire on the part of the working classes to obtain on fair and just terms the possession of the houses in which they lived. There was nothing in his opinion which conduced more to thrift and the self-control and independence of the working classes than their being enabled on fair terms to obtain possession of their houses; and some time ago he promised large audiences in the north that if no other Member of the House would introduce such a Measure as this he would gladly introduce it and do his utmost to secure its passing. Many Members of the present Government, when in Opposition, promised to support legislation of this character; indeed, he believed that the large majority which the present Government 270 possessed was largely due to the fact that right hon. Gentlemen pledged themselves to bring in social legislation of a character which would benefit the working classes of the country. He did not hesitate to say that if the Government had brought ill Measures such as this the results of the recent bye-elections would not have been so disastrous to the Unionist cause as they had been.

LORD HARRIS
said the Government offered no opposition to the Second Reading, indeed, they evinced their interest in the matter last year by suggesting Amendments to the Bill when introduced, which his noble Friend was able to accept. Last Session a Bill of a somewhat similar character was introduced in the other House, but it contained certain provisions which were not included in this Bill. For instance, it laid down roles as to the proportion of the purchase-money to be advanced, and it enabled local authorities to advance money to working men with which to build houses as well as to acquire the dwellings in which they in fact resided. The present Bill only authorised advances for the latter purpose. It was pointed out on the Second Reading of the Bill introduced into the House of Commons that the effect of such a Bill might possibly be to throw upon local ratepayers pecuniary burdens for the benefit of private individuals, and that being the case it was obviously incumbent upon the Legislature to examine very carefully the details of a Measure of the kind, and make sure that whilst they were doing their best to render more comfortable the homes of the working classes they did not do injustice to those upon whom the primary pecuniary burden was laid. His instructions were to offer no objection to the Second Reading; but of course the Local Government Board reserved to itself the right to criticise the proposals when the Bill got into Committee.

§ THE MARQUESS or LONDONDERRY
said that at first sight the proposal that the money of the ratepayers should, at the discretion of the local authority, be given to workmen to enable them to obtain possession of their dwellings was open to criticism. He could not help thinking, however, that the local authority who were on the spot and capable of making every possible inquiry were 271 the persons best able to decide whether money should be advanced to honest working men for the purpose now proposed.

THE EARL OF KIMBERLEY
thought the principle of the Bill was one which it was very desirable should receive the consideration of the House. He did not believe that the risk of overburdening the ratepayers would be serious, provided always that not too much was advanced upon the security of the houses. He was not very sanguine as to workmen in many places desiring to purchase their houses, and for the very reason that workmen were very migratory. They had to move from place to place in order to obtain employment, and he believed that in a large number of cases to become the owners of their dwellings would not assist them. But there was another matter which was not touched in the Bill, and that was the provision of proper dwellings. There were many places, especially in rural districts, where there were not suitable dwellings and where it was extremely desirable that such dwellings should be provided. The principle of the Bill would certainly have his support.