§ 2.43 p.m.
§ Order of the Day for the House to be put into Committee read.
§ Moved, That the House do now resolve itself into Committee.—(Lord Shepherd.)
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.
§ House in Committee accordingly:
§ [The Earl of DROGHEDA in the Chair]
§ Clauses 1 and 2 agreed to.
§ Schedule:
§ Amendments of Certain Provisions of 23 and 24 Geo. 5. c. 51.
§ 1. In section one hundred and thirty-nine (which as originally enacted provided that the council of a borough should not promote a Bill for constituting the borough a county borough unless its population was seventy-five thousand or upwards) for the words "is seventy-five thousand" there shall be substituted the words "as estimated by the Registrar-General is seventy-five thousand."
§
LORD KENNET moved to add to paragraph 1:
and at the end of the section there shall be added 'and the councils of two or more boroughs shall not promote a Bill for the purpose of uniting those boroughs and constituting the united borough a county borough unless the population of the boroughs as estimated by the Registrar General is seventy-five thousand or upwards'.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I have set down this Amendment in order, if possible, to obtain elucidation of a point which I raised with the noble Lord, Lord Shepherd, on the Second Reading of this Bill. Boroughs cannot promote proceedings to obtain county status in accordance with the provisions of this Bill, as it amends other Bills, unless their population as estimated by the Registrar-General is 75,000. But there seems to be a case which is at any rate doubtful in the minds of many municipal authorities. Suppose that there are two or more boroughs, neither of which has a population estimated at 75,000 but which nevertheless desire to promote proceedings to obtain county status: Are such boroughs precluded by this legislation from taking such proceedings if the total population of the boroughs concerned in the proceedings exceeds the figure of 75,000? This seems to be a point which ought to be provided for. In my view these
1205
authorities should not be precluded from taking proceedings which may be in the public interest. At any rate there is some doubt on the matter, a doubt confirmed by legal advice, and it seems to me desirable to elucidate the matter. I trust that this Amendment may provide an opportunity for such elucidation. I beg to move.
§
Amendment moved—
Page 2, line 8, at end insert the said words. —(Lord Kennet.)
§ LORD SHEPHERDSection 139 of the Local Government Act of 1933 does not give authority to any council to apply for county powers. The section is a negative one: it says merely that the council of a borough shall not apply for county powers if the population of that borough is less than 75,000. Although we are asking your Lordships to re-adopt the provisions of that section the present Bill proposes to amend it slightly by determining the population upon figures provided by the Registrar-General instead of by the census of 1931. The Amendment of the noble Lord in fact proposes something which will not give to the authorities the power that he desires because, as I have said, the section is negative in character. I am advised that at present, whilst the council of a borough containing under 75,000 population may not apply there is nothing in the section to prevent three councils joining together to apply for county powers. In view of that explanation, I hope that the noble Lord will not find it necessary to press his Amendment.
There is one further point I should mention. As your Lordships were informed the other day, the Government themselves are undertaking a review of the boundaries and powers of local government throughout the country. They are anxious that in the meantime there shall be no large departure from the present set-up. Therefore, if an application were made by three boroughs in this country, the Government might have to oppose it in order that the issues might be clear when their final report became available. In view of this, I trust that the noble Lord will feel able to withdraw his Amendment.
§ LORD KENNETI am obliged to the noble Lord for his clear explanation. If I may say so, I accept the latter part of 1206 his observations, that this is not a question of policy at all. It would not be effective either way in which His Majesty's Government's hands are free under the Statute. It is simply a question of legality, not of policy. I understand from the noble Lord that there is nothing in the present section, in the present law, to prevent two or more county boroughs with a joint population of over 75,000 from taking the proceedings to which I have referred. I see that the noble Lord nods his head. If that is so, I accept that as a satisfactory explanation of the existing state of the law.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMay I confirm what I conveyed to the noble Lord by nodding my head—namely that at present, two or more boroughs associated together can, notwithstanding the section about which we have been talking, make an application?
§ LORD KENNETI am much obliged to the noble Lord. I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
§ Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
§ Schedule agreed to.
§ House resumed: Bill reported without amendment.