HL Deb 08 February 1977 vol 379 cc1104-9

6.15 p.m.

Baroness STEDMAN rose to move, That the Local Authorities' Cemeteries Order 1977, laid before the House on 18th January, be approved. The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I beg to move that the Local Authorities' Cemeteries Order 1977, laid before the House on 18th January, be approved. It is now nearly three years since this House debated and approved the Local Authorities' Cemeteries Order 1974. That order and the present one are, of course, related. The present order extends, amends, revokes and re-enacts the earlier one.

One consequence of the revocation and re-enactment of the 1974 order will be that the management code for cemeteries maintained by the burial authorities defined in the Local Government Act 1972 will continue to be found in a single Statutory Instrument; and this will, I do not doubt, prove to be a very convenient feature. Another consequence is, however, that we may, at first sight, seem to be introducing much more fresh legislation than, in fact, we are. It may be helpful to your Lordships if I make it clear at the outset that the main new topics with which this order is concerned are largely covered by four out of its 23 articles and by one out of its three Schedules; I should, however, mislead your Lordships if I did not add that Schedule 3 is a great deal longer than the other two put together.

The four articles to which I refer are Article 9 on the plan and record of cemetery, Article 11 on the Registration of burials and disinterments, Article 12 on the Storage of records and Article 16 on the maintenance of graves, et cetera; removal of memorials and levelling, et cetera. Schedule 3 relates to Article 16.

There is, in addition, a useful new contingency provision in Article 21 whereby the Council of the Isles of Scilly can be fitted into the pattern of the legislation for burial authorities. The provisions made in the 1974 order for the Commonwealth War Graves Commission are somewhat changed in the present order—and this is in no small measure a consequence of the new Article 16. Some other provisions in the 1974 order have been amended in the light of subsequent examination and discussion. Much of the 1974 order is, however, simply reproduced in the present order unamended, or amended only in incidental and consequential respects. The amount of new law is limited accordingly.

Before I turn to the new material, I should like to mention three general matters. The first is that the making of this order was preceded by the consultations which subsection (4) of Section 214 of the Local Government Act 1972 requires. This is a valuable procedure which enables us to benefit from the experience and opinions of those closely concerned with the subject—including experience of administering the 1974 order provisions. The second is that the order continues in a trend of local government legislation including and following the Act of 1972, That trend is to leave to local authorities wide discretion in the exercise of powers relating to local services. Expressions such as "may, if they think fit", "on such terms as they think proper" and "such fees as they think proper" recur throughout the order. The third is simply to remind your Lordships that we cannot, in these orders deal with cemeteries other than those provided by local authorities.

To turn to Articles 9, 11 and 12, we have sought to provide a basic prescription for the records which are essential to the economical and fully effective management of cemeteries, keeping fully in our minds the pressing need to avoid adding to public expenditure. Many burial authorities will doubtless find that they are, in practice, already maintaining records more extensive than those stipulated by the order. I do not doubt that they will continue to do so, because proper records enable them to do the job efficiently and economically. Requirements to register burials go back as far as an Act of 1812, and were extended by various later applications of the provisions of that Act. The order provides, fairly simply, for plans and written records of burials, disinternments and reinternments and of rights granted by the burial authority and its predecessors; and for their safe storage.

Article 16 and Schedule 3 contain provisions for lawn cemetery conversions. Powers for this purpose have, over a period, been obtained by local authorities in over 100 local Acts. The objectives of the burial authority are to improve the appearance of a cemetary, or part of a cemetery, where they carry out such a conversion, while making maintenance simpler and cheaper. A certain amount can be done by simply putting and keeping graves and memorials in order and by levelling the surface of a grave with the level of the surrounding ground where the grave is a simple one of earth and grass. Different considerations arise, however, where the burial authority wishes to remove tombstones, kerbs railings and so on, or move them to a fresh position or to level with the surrounding ground a grave which is significantly more than just earth and grass. In such circumstances there must clearly be, at the least, an effort made to consult the owner of the memorial rights and notice given to the public of what is intended. Attention must be paid to objections; and objections by those most nearly concerned, relatives and the owners of memorial rights must have special weight. These are matters which have been covered in local Acts and the order provides for them; indeed it provides somewhat stronger protection for the public than is to be found in the local Acts.

As your Lordships know, one of the features of the Local Government Act 1972 was that it set out to provide means to reduce the mass of local enactments and the variety of statutory provisions which govern similar local services from one area to another. The order repeals local legislation for the matters described in Article 16 of the order, except as regards operations already in progress, so that the order will provide a uniform code for this aspect of the management of local authorities' cemeteries. The order is, as I have said, a more modest addition to local legislation than appears at first sight, but I commend it to your Lordships as a useful one.

Moved, That the Local Authorities' Cemeteries Order 1977, laid before the House on 18th January, be approved.—(Baroness Stedman.)

6.23 p.m.

Lord MOWBRAY and STOURTON

My Lords, we are all grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Stedman, for introducing so succinctly this cemeteries order. When the first of these orders was introduced three years ago by her much lamented noble friend Lord Garnsworthy we, on these Benches, and all Members of the House, welcomed the order as being a great step forward in the tidying-up of an enormous legal tangle of legislation. For that we were grateful. However, it was always understood that there would be further need to look at events as they took place, and the Government have looked and brought forward a second order which, as the noble Baroness said, is basically similar to what we have had before.

Let me express immediately welcome for all these four articles, 9, 11, 12, which have been changed quite a lot, and Article 16 and Schedule 3 in particular. I should like to mention that there has been slight anxiety, as your Lordships will be aware, concerning the action of certain councils with regard to their local cemeteries. As Lord Garnsworthy said three years ago, local councils tend to have their cemeteries committee meetings late in the evening, and people who fail to turn up get put on the cemeteries committee. It is not a matter of great import. Although that is the case from the point of view of local councils, from the point of view of relatives this is a matter of deep feeling and one cannot be sensitive enough. I was given a letter only today, although it arrived last month, which says: We discovered last August that as we had not objected by April last our headstone and kerb will be removed and the grave flattened. We have not seen a notice on the wall of the cemetery nor one in the local paper. We have paid for maintenance since 1948 and feel that we should have been informed. I got nowhere by correspondence". That is a letter which could probably be paralleled by many others.

As I understand this new order, under Article 16 and Schedule 3 in particular, this action will not be possible provided the council have the address of people who are maintaining graves. The question I should like to ask the noble Baroness is whether the fact will be made known at cemeteries and in local papers that people who are maintaining graves should let local councils know their addresses. This is a simple matter which could easily go by the board, because of the fact of local advertisements and that if you live away you probably visit your cemetery only once a year on the anniversary of your relation's death. Therefore, I ask what publicity is going to be given to this, because it would be a tremendous step forward. Am I right that if the local council still wishes to tangle with the relative who is objecting, the appeal lies with the Secretary of State? I should like to have that confirmed. I welcome the uniformity of codes being put across all the councils concerned, and I welcome Schedule 3 in particular.

There is one other point: Where no relation is left but there is a monument of great interest, quite often societies are formed to look after the interests of famous people. One mentioned to me only today was the Galsworthy Society. What rights would a society like that have over maintaining the memorial concerned? Are they able to obtain rights if they do not have them? Perhaps the noble Baroness could tell me something about that. I have nothing more to say except to thank the noble Baroness for bringing in this order.

Lord GREENWOOD of ROSSEN-DALE

My Lords, like the noble Lord, Lord Mowbray and Stourton, I welcome the introduction of this tidying-up order. I wonder whether, while declaring an interest as president of the Cremation Society and also as chairman of the London Cremation Company, I might use this opportunity to ask my noble friend what progress the Government have made with their consideration of the Brodrick Report, which of course deals with much wider issues relating to the law of burial and cremation.

6.29 p.m.

Baroness STEDMAN

My Lords, may I take first the last question from my noble friend Lord Greenwood. I am not in a position to answer about the progress we have made on the Brodrick Report, but I shall make inquiries about it and write to my noble friend, if that would satisfy him for the time being. So far as Lord Mowbray's questions are concerned, of course this order looks after the rights of relatives and those to whom the burial rights have been assigned. Provided the authorities have been notified when there is a change in the ownership of the rights, then those people will be consulted at all stages while this order is in being.

So far as publicity on the change of rights is concerned, I think that that is a useful point. It is not part of this order, but it is something that I shall bring to the notice of my right honourable friend and ask whether he can give some advice to local authorities on this point. So far as the rights of societies who are looking after graves of special or historical interest are concerned, I suppose that it is possible to get a grave or tombstone listed, and the same rights would apply to whoever was responsible for the upkeep as would apply to an individual's memorial rights. This order would not affect the right of a society to look after or maintain the grave of some eminent person.

Lord MOWBRAY and STOURTON

Would that apply to memorials too, my Lords?

Baroness STEDMAN

Yes, my Lords. In the new order we have provided for three months' notice to be given, whereas it was only three weeks in the previous one, provided that the addresses have been recorded in the last 30 years, which is a fair time. It means that perhaps authorities need a reminder from time to time, if there is a change in the burial rites, so they can tidy things up.

I think I have covered most of the points that have been raised. By amending and extending the provisions of the 1974 order, this order covers all the matters within the scope of the enabling power which we have identified as requiring general legislation. What we want to maintain at all times is a balance between people's emotions and administrative efficiency and convenience. This is sometimes difficult to strike, and I am sure it is too much to ask that the lawn cemetery provisions in particular will entirely suit all preferences, but I hope that most people will find that we have been reasonable in the conditions we have laid down in this order, which I commend to the House.

On Question, Motion agreed to.