§ EARL BUXTONhad given Notice to ask His Majesty's Government whether 320 the Minister of Health has made, or proposes to make, a Draft Order substituting relieving officers for the overseers of the poor, for the purpose of giving in rural districts orders for the doctor or for admission to the workhouse or other necessary relief in cases of sudden urgent necessity and sudden dangerous illness; whether the Rating Act, 1925, Section 62, does not require that the duties and powers of the overseers of giving relief in these cases should be transferred to such "local authorities or persons as might be expedient"; whether there are not at present in the rural districts two local overseers living in every parish, while the relieving officers often reside five and sometimes eight or nine miles away; whether the Government and Minister of Health will take steps to secure that in every parish in rural districts the parish guardian, or some resident ratepayer appointed by the guardians, or some other resident shall have power to give orders for the doctor or other necessary relief in the above-mentioned cases of emergency.
The noble Earl said: My Lords, I beg to ask the Question standing in my name.
VISCOUNT GAGEMy Lords, I think I can answer the noble Earl's Question fairly simply. The Order was placed before your Lordships' House in draft form last September. It remained on the Table of this House for the period required and is being circulated to the local authorities to-day. I may point out that no objection was taken to it when it was laid on the Table of the House. I think everybody would agree that it would be most undesirable that relief in these cases of necessity or urgency should be impeded or delayed owing to any cumbersomeness in the administrative arrangements. But I hope to be able to convince the noble Earl that this Order will not produce that effect.
In the first place the overseers at present hardly ever use the powers that they have under the existing law. During the last five years for which figures are available the maximum sum expended in the whole country for any one year under this system was £94. Out of the 14,336 parishes in England and Wales only 47 321 during the whole of that period of five years made use of the system referred to in the noble Earl's Question. In the case of this very small minority, 47 in all as against 14,000 odd, investigations have shown that it was traditional custom rather than convenience that was responsible for most of those cases being dealt with by the overseers. In these days, with telephone communication and motors, the relieving officer is usually very easily rendered available, and if by any chance he is not, the medical officer of the union is empowered by law to act on his behalf. I should also point out that the relieving officer or the medical officer can give instructions by telephone; indeed, it is very after much easier to get into touch with either of those officials than with a private individual such as the noble Earl suggests.
Careful investigations have led His Majesty's Government to the conclusion that there is no real reason why this small minority should not conform to the practice of the majority, or why the overseers, who are to be abolished under the Rating and Valuation Act, should remain on for this purpose only. I would point out to your Lordships that the Minister before drafting this Order approached the Association of Poor Law Unions for advice as to the course which he should adopt. The association recommended that the overseers' Poor Law powers should be transferred to the relieving officer, and the Minister has accepted that recommendation. In order to remove any possibility of undue hardship arising the Ministry have now in draft, a. Circular Letter to boards of guardians referring to this Order in Council.
It will contain the following paragraph:—
I am to request that the guardians will take into their special consideration the facilities available to the relieving officers of the union for the discharge of the duties now transferred to them and will satisfy themselves that the arrangements made by them for this purpose are satisfactory and efficient. The transferred duties will, of course, be specially borne in mind in any re-arrangement of the existing relief districts.If the Minister were to follow the proposal of the noble Earl and appoint a guardian specially for this purpose, with powers to act, in each parish, the consequences might be extremely serious. 322 It is contrary to the main principles of Poor Law administration that individual guardians should have any discretion in this kind of relief. There is too good reason to fear that such a discretion would be open to abuse. I hope that in view of the rarity of the cases in which the overseers have up to the present used their powers, the very careful investigations which have been carried out by the Ministry, the recommendations of the Association of Poor Law Unions, and the covering letter that is going to be issued to local authorities, the noble Earl will be satisfied that the danger of delay in the giving of relief under the suggested Order is really practically non-existent.
§ EARL BUXTONMy Lords, I am much obliged to my noble friend for the answer he has given to me. It explains the position very clearly. When I put this Question down I did not know that the Draft Order had already been passed and that does make a difference. I confess that my noble friend has satisfied me that this matter has received very careful attention and that in the opinion of the authorities concerned—not only the Government but those who have the fullest title to give an opinion upon this subject—there are very few cases indeed of emergency in which the overseers have had to take action throughout the country, and so far as those cases are concerned I understand that they will be covered by this new Draft Order. I think also it will be a satisfaction to those who have asked me to put down this Question that this letter of instruction is to be sent out. I should like to ask, however, whether the noble Viscount would make it clear that if any difficulties or cases of hardship arise, they will be considered and possibly, if it be found necessary, some amendment made in the Draft Order. In these circumstances and in view of what the noble Viscount has stated about the Draft Order being now passed and having been accepted by the persons mainly concerned, I do not propose in any way to oppose the Draft Order.
There is, however, one point in reference to the Draft Order that I should like to make. I confess that I was not myself aware that this Draft Order had been on the Table all this time. It is only two days ago that those who are interested in this matter were aware that 323 it had been passed. One question arises in connection with it. Your Lordships now have a Committee sitting which is consolidating the various Poor Law Acts. Does the Draft Order that has been passed and which concerns a very important point become part of the statutory Acts which this Committee have to consider, and will they consolidate the Acts referring to this particular point? I shall be glad if my noble friend will kindly consider that matter and let me know the result later, if he is not able to do so now, because I understand there is a difficulty in the minds of some of my noble friends.
§ LORD PARMOORMy Lords, I should like to say one word by way of thanks to the noble Viscount opposite for the answer he has given. There is no doubt—I am speaking only of the rural parishes, which are the parishes with which I am acquainted personally—that there was anxiety at the supersession of the overseers by the relieving officer. What we are dealing with is not relief from the poor rate generally, but relief from the poor rate in cases of sudden and urgent necessity and medical relief. It has been suggested to me from various sources that in a case of sudden emergency the relieving officer would not be sufficiently near at hand to deal with the matter. The noble Viscount has shown—and I am glad he has—that after all the number of cases involved is exceedingly small. I think he said £94 was the amount over the whole country. If, in addition to the revision which is made here, which is the substitution of the relieving officer, the attention of the guardians is called to this point, I must say I think that any criticism has been perfectly and fairly met, and there is really no fear in the future that even in cases of sudden and urgent necessity the relief which ought to be given will not be forthcoming. Therefore, although I had intended to question the noble Viscount further, I consider his answer is entirely satisfactory.