THE ACTING CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (LORD BALFOUR OF BURLEIGH)Your Lordships will recollect that yesterday I asked the House to make a considerable number of alterations in the Standing Orders. They were all of a formal character and quite non-contentious. The proposed additional Order which is on the Paper today was also on the Paper yesterday, but it was intimated to me that there would be objection to it, and I thought it would be more convenient to the House that those Amendments which were non-contentious should be passed first, so that a clear and simple issue should be presented to the House with regard to this Order. The clause refers only to the metropolis, and only to traffic questions in the metropolis itself. The whole class of questions affecting regulation of traffic are obviously of great importance, and I am afraid they are not becoming any less complicated than they were before. Your Lordships know that the Commissioner of Police is 479 the authority entrusted with the regulation of traffic in the metropolis, and it has been the practice for the last six or seven years for the Commissioner of Police to go thoroughly into all proposals which might cause obstruction of traffic or make the regulation of traffic more difficult, such as, for instance, the placing of tramways in, comparatively speaking, narrow streets. Reports are made by the Commissioner of Police to the Home Office, and the Home Office either takes action or not according to its discretion. But the Commissioner of Police in the past has only discharged this task under circumstances of great disadvantage and loss of time. He has no means of official knowledge soon enough with regard to proposals that are being made. In other words, he cannot know what is proposed until after the Home Office has become in possession of the Bills which are deposited, and that is practically not until the last days of the year. Thus much valuable time is lost, and the end of February or March is reached before the Commissioner of Police can make his report and the Home Office can take action upon it for the information of Parliament. I believe that the proposal which is made in this Standing Order would be not only to the advantage of the Commissioner of Police, but also to the advantage of the promoters of all this class of Bills. It is obviously for their advantage that they should know as soon as possible if any objection is to be taken to their proposals, because it is inconvenient for them to be objected to on this class of point after the Bill has been actually sent to a Committee. It may have to be considered by the Committee, but it would be much more convenient that the Committees and the Officers of the House should know of the objections at an early date. There is no intention to make the Commissioner of Police in any way an autocrat in these matters. No new duties are put upon him. He has this duty to discharge now. The only effect of this proposal is to enable him to discharge the duty earlier and with more satisfaction to himself and others than at the present time. The initiative in regard to this proposed Standing Order did not come from me. It was left as a legacy by the noble Earl the Chairman of Committees, but I have carefully looked into the matter. My judgment coincides with that of Lord Onslow, and I recommend the change to the House.
§ Moved to resolve, That the following new Standing Order be made—
§ 30A. Where by any Bill the construction of a work of any kind is proposed to be authorised by which street traffic or the regulation of street traffic in the Metropolitan Police District may be affected, a copy of so much of the plans and sections required to be deposited in the office of the Clerk of the Parliaments as relates to such work shall be deposited at the office of the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis on or before the thirtieth' day of November immediately preceding the application for the Bill.—(Lord Balfour of Burleigh.)
§ VISCOUNT HILL, on behalf of Lord DUNMORE, moved an Amendment substituting the Traffic Branch of the Board of Trade for the Commissioner of Police. The noble Viscount said: My Lords, I have been asked to move the Amendment which stands in the name of my noble friend. The noble Lord, in moving the addition of this Standing Order, spoke of the position of the Police at the present moment, and of their not receiving sufficiently early notice of proposed improvements. That may be so. I do not doubt it. Neither do I wish to say that the Police have not up to the present time carried out the work of regulating the traffic satisfactorily. But me rather object to the Police having full control of the traffic, although we agree that they should be consulted. His Majesty's Government already have. a Traffic Branch under the Board of Trade, and the London County Council are of opinion that that is the proper authority to govern the widening and alteration of the streets, although the Police are very well capable of regulating the traffic when those widenings have taken place. This proposal seems to us to be entirely contrary to the recommendations of Royal Commissions on this subject. It has always been recommended that an independent tribunal should be appointed for the traffic of London. As I have said, there is a Traffic Branch in connection with the Board of Trade, and we consider that that is the proper authority to deal with this matter. There has been considerable difficulty in the past with the Commissioner of Police in regard to street widening, and so forth. I am not going into the particulars or into the figures now, but what the Commissioner of Police suggested to the London County Council 481 with regard to certain streets would, if carried out, have involved an enormous expense to the ratepayers of London. The Commissioner's requirements were unreasonable in many instances, and we consider that these questions should be dealt with by an expert who is better informed and has much more experience than the Commissioner of Police. I believe every one is agreed that the traffic of London should be under an independent tribunal.
§
Amendment moved—
To leave out in lines t and 7 ("Commissioners "of Police of the "Metropolis") and insert ("Traffic "Branch of the Board of Trade in duplicate ").—Viscount Hill.)
§ THE LORD PRESIDENT OF THE COUNCIL (EARL BEAUCHAMP)My Lords, I rise on behalf of the Home Office to express the hope that this Amendment will not be carried. The Standing Order in the form in which it is upon the Paper conies, I think, with special authority, being, as the noble Lord the temporary Lord Chairman said just now, moved by himself after an independent investigation into the circumstances, as a result of which he was able to express the opinion that the Notion originally proposed by the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, was one which ought to be adopted by this House. It comes to. your Lordships, therefore, with a double measure of authority. The main object of it is to enable the Police, who advise the Secretary of State on street traffic questions, to prepare their observations at an early date, and it is thought that the earlier they can do so the more convenient it will be for the Committees and also for the promoters, whoever they might be, even in the case where the promoters are the London County Council themselves. In any ease the Home Office would very much desire that the Amendment should not be carried. Perhaps I might appeal on a question like this to those members in your Lordships' House who lately sat upon a Tramways Bill which was promoted by the London County Council. I think the noble Lord whom I see on the Back Bench opposite, Lord Clinton, was one of the members of that Committee. I understand that information was laid before that Committee by the Police and by the Home Office showing that reports of this character deal with intricate and important questions affecting street traffic. This matter has been well done in the past by 482 the Police, and we believe that this proposal will facilitate the work of the Police.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYMy Lords, I do not think my noble friend behind me has called in question the proposal made on behalf of the Lord Chairman that earlier notice should be given of any works which might cause interference with traffic. That is not the point in my noble friend's Amendment. The point which he desires to raise is that the proper department of the Government which ought to be put in motion is not. the Police, and through them the Home Office, but the Traffic Branch of the Board of Trade. I do not want to express any confident opinion on the point, but any of your Lordships who listened to the noble Earl the Lord President in the remarks he has just delivered must be aware that he did not address himself to that issue in the least. The noble Earl has been lately himself honourably connected with the Home Office, and he probably speaks with great knowledge of that Department but with less knowledge of the Board of Trade. I must say that in dealing with an Amendment of this kind his observations, always entitled to weight, would have been entitled to more weight if he had addressed himself to the point of the Amendment. There is a Traffic Branch of the Board of Trade. Why is that Traffic Branch not to be used? When I had the honour of being connected with the Board of Trade, as your Lordships know, we bad it in contemplation to pass a Bill for the traffic of London which was to have involved the creation of a great traffic authority—I do not say entirely subservient to the Board of Trade; far from it—but taking its initiative from the Board of Trade, although, of course, with the co-operation of the Home Office and the Local Government Board, the other Departments concerned. Though I should not for a moment desire to place any authority which I possess against; the authority of His Majesty's present advisers, I think it would have been more satisfactory to your Lordships if the noble Earl had been able to tell us why the Home Office are selected rather than the Board of Trade in this instance.
§ EARL BEAUCHAMPI am quite ready, with the permission of your Lordships, to give the noble Marquess that information. It is because the work has been done so satisfactorily by the Home 483 Office before. We are anxious they should go on doing it.
§ On Question, whether to agree to the proposed Amendment resolved in the negative:
§ Then the proposed new Standing Order agreed to, and ordered to he added to the Roll of Standing Orders, and to be printed. (No. 142.)