THE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND (Lord BALFOUR of BURLEIGH)My Lords, in moving that this Bill be read a second time, I think it necessary to say a few words of explanation as to the objects of the Bill. The necessity of the Bill arose in this way. Under the Agricultural Rates Act, 1896, Scotland and Ireland received respectively eleven-eightieths and nine-eightieths of the sum allocated to England. The Local Government Bill for Ireland of the present year has given to Ireland the equivalent of half of the agricultural rates levied in that country; and, of course, when that departure was taken, it was obviously unfair that Scotland should not get equal treatment. The object, therefore, of this Bill is to give to Scotland the equivalent of one-half of the agricultural rates levied in that country. The first clause, as your Lordships may observe, gives only seven-sixteenths, the reason being that the calculation in England is made exclusive of the value of agricultural buildings, whereas in Scotland there is no such division. It is believed, on good authority, that one-eighth represents the value of the buildings, and that accounts for the apparent difference between the proportions given to the two countries. The difference between the rating system in Scotland and the system in England and Ireland prevents the allocation of the money in precisely the same way, and therefore the Government have had to choose purposes to which this money could be properly and legitimately applied, as has been, in fact, the case on almost every other occasion when money has been given by former Scottish legislation. The second clause of the Bill indicates the purposes to which this money is to be applied. The sum with which the Bill deals is a sum of about £95,000 a year. The Act of 1896, which was passed for Scotland, contained no definite guarantee that the whole of the deficiency in the rates, caused by its provisions, would be made up, but it was the intention of the Government that it should all be made up. Owing to an error in the calculation, the sum which 620 was allocated to Scotland, being eleven-eightieths, did not come up to the standard which was first formed, and therefore there has been up to the present time a deficiency in the sum allocated to Scotland, which is required to make up the proportion of five-eighths of the rates given to the agricultural occupier. The first purpose under this Bill is to allocate the sum of £20,000 for the purpose of making up that deficiency. I think it necessary to add a caution that no guarantee is even now given that an absolute equivalent of five-eighths of the rates of any given year will be handed over, because the calculations are made upon the basis of the rates for the financial year ending May, 1896; if, in the meantime, the rates have risen, there will still be a small deficiency. The second purpose mentioned in the second clause of the Bill is to devote £25,000 a year to increasing the grant to meet the expenses of the police in Scotland. The sum given in Scotland for police, unlike that in England, does not amount to one-half the total expenditure. It was fixed in 1889 as a definite sum of £155,000; and as the population has increased, and as additions have been made to the police force, the proportion of the expenditure paid from the Imperial Exchequer has diminished. It is in no sense true to say that this increase of cost is due to extravagance on the part of the local authorities. The increase of the total sum expended upon police, from £310,000 in 1889 to £370,000 at the present time, arises from the necessity for more police in the more populous centres of Scotland. The sum given to Scotland for police will be raised to £180,000 a year, and though this does not quite work out at one-half the total expenditure, it will come much nearer to it than is the case at the present time. The third purpose to which a portion of this money is allocated is to enforcing the laws against trawling in the territorial waters. The complaints as to this practice have been very persistent in recent years, and it is a matter of common knowledge that the existing provisions for enforcing the law are not sufficient. In England fishery districts have been formed for enforcing the law, but this is not possible 621 in the case of Scotland, and the Act of 1885, which provided for the formation of Fishery Committees has, so far as its provisions are concerned, been almost entirely a dead letter. Protection to a certain extent has up to the present time been afforded by the Government, but it has been felt to be an injustice that that should be done for Scotland which is not done for England. The devotion of £15,000 a year, which is provided in the second clause for this purpose, is fair to Scotland and to England alike, because, although it does not come out of local rates, it comes out of money which is given to Scotland, and which would otherwise have gone to provide for expenditure which would have fallen upon the local rates. By an arrangement with the Treasury, the Treasury Votes will be wholly relieved in the future of any expenditure for this purpose, and I think that will be recognised under all the circumstances which I have endeavoured to explain, to be fair and reasonable. The last sub-section of this clause, as well as the proviso to the clause, contain some important provisions for the future of Scottish education. By the proviso, the money available for technical education under the Act of 1890, which was liable under that Act for deduction, on account of certain diseases of cattle, will now cease to be chargeable to that particular fund, and will be transferred to another fund. I do not think anything more ridiculous could be imagined than making the sum available for technical education, one year with another, depend upon how much happened to be necessary for compensation to owners of slaughtered cattle in that particular year. By the provisions we now make we believe greater stability will be given to the amount which may be spent on technical education, and those who have the management of the particular form of education will be better able to calculate, year by year, what resources they will have at their disposal. The sub-section further gives the residue of the sum with which we are now dealing—namely, £35,000 a year—to secondary and technical education in Scotland. We have already, under a former Act, £60,000 a year devoted for that purpose, but that sum is not nearly so large in proportion 622 to the needs of Scotland as the sum devoted in England; and I am bound to say that owing to the particular method in which it is distributed some doubts have arisen as to whether it is spent in the best possible way. We hope to do much, not only in adding to the resources available for technical education, but by inducing local authorities to consolidate and combine in the expenditure of the money which they have already at their disposal. Many questions of organisation are occupying the attention of the Scottish Education Department and the precise method by which this additional grant is to be applied will be a matter for future discussion. It is not provided for in the present Bill, and therefore I do not think it necessary to go into it at any length at the present time. All I can say is that the important considerations involved are not being lost sight of, and that we hope in a short time to present a scheme which will command the approval of those interested in Scottish education. I beg to move that the Bill be read a second time.
§ Question put.
§ Bill read a second time.
§ Standing Orders XXXIX. and XLV. suspended, and Bill read a third time and passed.