Source: https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/lords/1929/apr/17/local-government-scotland-bill
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 08:27:13+00:00

Document:
My Lords, in view of the fate of the more important Amendments moved in Committee, it may save your Lordships' time if, on going into Report, the general case for such Amendments were put very shortly so as to obtain, if possible, an assurance from the Government that should the evils foretold regarding the rating and franchise clauses come to pass, as will be evident by 1931, and should the Conservative Party be then in power, action will be taken to remedy such evils. We are dealing with a singular situation. It has been proved in debate, last year and this, when discussing both the Rating and Valuation and the Scottish Local Government Bills, that, unlike the English Bill, this Scottish Bill fails to a large extent to effect that consolidation of local authorities which was represented as being its cardinal principle and, further, that it inflicts on county councils a vicious system of rating and a franchise so peculiar as to be unknown in any other country. It was our boast that we had taught the world the representative 13 system and the proper control of the public purse by the representatives of those that fill it, and yet the Mother of Parliaments is called upon to set up this travesty of both.
We regret the departure in another place from the scheme for consolidation by the setting up of district councils and the powers given to burghs. But the main blot on this Bill is its unjust and tangled rating provisions, which are obviously detrimental to all sound local administration and finance. The method in which relief is given to agriculture is again directly contrary to the cardinal principle of the derating policy which was to remove all rates from land. Much of the grants is to be filtered away in contradiction again to the declared policy of the Government, because the uneconomic crofter, on whom millions of the taxpayers' money has already been squandered, is to be again heavily subsidised at the expense of economic agriculture. One of the most objectionable of the rating anomalies, that under which occupiers were to be benefited by a rise in rates, has been removed. On the other hand, others have neither been explained nor defended. The tiny seed from which these evils have sprung was undoubetdly sown in the Crofter and Small Landholder Acts, also in the now indefensible Rent Restrictions Act, and so there has grown up this upas tree to overshadow the land. Therefore, the relief to agriculture so freely and fully accorded to England is in part denied to the economic agriculture of Scotland, and with the result that in several counties rate receivers will have the predominant voice in local expenditure.
Since we have failed to persuade the Government to recast such rating provisions, and since it has rejected except as regards two clauses our very reasonable Amendments, none of them hostile to the Bill, I feel constrained to ask whether, on the reasonable assumption that the Conservative Party are in a majority in another place, even after next month, the Government will give a definite assurance in the course of the Report stage or on Third Reading that Dover House will not only watch the effect of these rating clauses but will deal with them in the light of experience. We desire to protest once more against a system which gives the rate receiver in certain counties so preponderating an 14 influence in local administration. We also question the justice of compelling owners and employers to act as rate collectors and making them responsible as ratepayers for the unpaid rates of other ratepayers, and we must all desire to see the rating system of Scotland brought into harmony with the requirements of equity and simplicity.
The Morning Post, in its leader on the Budget, wrote:— Farmers will now enjoy the rare satisfaction of throwing the demand notes they have already received into the waste paper basket…a delirious experience. No doubt, the Scottish agriculturist will derive substantial benefits from this Bill, but there will be no such delirious experience for him. Instead of throwing the collector's demand note into the fire he will have to bind a cold bandage to his head to wrestle with all the calculations and conundrums contained in the Bill, knowing that the only outcome of his labour will be to find what considerable disbursements he, and especially the owner of the fixed capital invested in agriculture, has still to make. We rejoice that we are, at any rate, not to be dissociated from our more fortunate English brothers as regards the earlier commencement of the agricultural relief, and we trust that the Government will not remain deaf to all our arguments and warnings and will not decline to envisage a future in which this measure must necessarily be revised.
My Lords, my noble friend was kind enough to give mo notice that he would raise this discussion upon the present Motion, but his letter only reached me half an hour ago, and therefore I am sure he will forgive me if I do not reply at very great length to his speech, although I hope to give an answer which will satisfy your Lordships. My noble friend has been a critic, not altogether a hostile critic, but a critic of the Bill, and he has been joined by certain other Lords from Scotland for whose capacity in these matters both your Lordships and the Government have a profound respect. But I am bound to say that I am not aware that the Government have opposed a dead wall of opposition to my noble friend, as might have been gathered from the remarks of the noble Viscount.
15 Undoubtedly, we have a very difficult problem to solve, a difficult problem indeed however you look at it, because the topics which the Bill covers are very complicated and of very wide extent. They are additionally difficult to deal with when they relate to Scotland because of the necessity of adjusting the Scottish relief to an equality with the English relief. Of course if the Scottish system of rating were the same as the English system there would be no difficulty, it could be done straight off, but there are profound differences in the systems of rating, as your Lordships who have attended these debates are now very fully aware, and those difficulties have had to be reflected in the drafting of the Scottish Bill. You start, then, with a great difference in the rating systems. Then it is laid down by usage now extending over a great many years that whatever relief is given to England must also be given to Scotland. My noble friend, I am quite sure, would protest in the most urgent manner if the Government had proposed to deal with Scotland on a footing which would give that country less relief on the whole than that given to England. As your Lordships are aware, it always has to be calculated with the greatest nicety according to a certain formula. If England gets so much Scotland must get so much—a certain proportion.
My noble friend is familiar with the question—so many eightieths have to be given to Scotland. When you are dealing with systems of rating which differ fundamentally in the two countries and you have to apply an equal measure of relief, of course the result is very great complication, and that is reflected in the Bill now under your Lordships' consideration. So careful are the Government—I do not claim much credit for that, because I am quite sure we should never hear the last of it if we were not careful—to see that Scotland is never treated worse than England, that, as your Lordships will observe, we have endeavoured in the Amendments which we are about to discuss to deal with the great complications involved in the fact that the Scottish financial year does not begin at the same 16 time as the English financial year. Special provision has to be made so that relief shall be granted in respect of the period when the English Bill is in full operation and the Scottish Bill has not quite begun. That only shows how elaborate the provisions have to be and how careful the Government have been to see that no injustice is done to Scotland.
My noble friend says that there are other disturbing features: there is the crofter legislation. I am not, nor is any member of your Lordships' House who is in the present Government, responsible for the crofter legislation. I dare say if I expressed my full opinion upon the crofter legislation it might be at least as strong as any that would come from the mouth of my noble friend, but that really is not in question now. My noble friend also says there is the Rent Restrictions Act. I had something to do, I am sorry to say, with the original passage of the Rent Restrictions Act, but there is no doubt that many of its provisions are prolonged a long time out of date and ought to be amended, and the Government have promised that as soon as they get any time—which is the most difficult thing in the whole world—they will undertake the amendment of the Rent Restrictions Act. Time has gone on and now we are faced with this tremendous measure, the Scottish part of which is now passing through your Lordships' House. The extensive changes to be made in rating and in local government cover so much ground that it would be folly to think that they could be finally settled by proceedings in Parliament in the present Session. My noble friend asked whether the Government, if they are in office after the General Election, will promise to amend this Bill—I do not think that was exactly his phrase.
If the noble Marquess will give the same assurance as he has given about the Rent Restrictions Act I shall be quite content.
It is a little early to ask me to say that this Bill is out of date, though I have no doubt that it will become out of date in time and that whatever Government is in power will have to consider its amendment. Speaking quite seriously nothing 17 is move certain than that a Bill of this scope will require amendment hereafter. I might easily promise that without being rash. It is quite certain that both the English Bill and the Scottish Bill will require to be very carefully scrutinised by whatever Government is in power in order to see whether in minor matters the provisions in them do not require amendment. We have tried to meet noble Lords and we are going to try again very hard this evening to meet them. I had hoped that my noble friend who has just sat down would have expressed himself with a little more gratitude for the change in what was Clause 44, under which the repayment by the owner to the occupier is to be stereotyped, upon the motion of the noble Duke who sits behind me. That is a far-reaching change which I think, and indeed I know, is very welcome to the noble Viscount and the noble Duke and those who have acted with them. We will certainly continue to pursue that wholesome course of kindly concession wherever we can, and I am sure that at the end of these proceedings my noble friends will agree with me, when they have studied the Amendments which are on the Paper, that we have gone a long way in that direction.
I am very much obliged to my noble friend. I cannot undertake to give any promise as to what will be done by the new Government, or perhaps a slightly different Government, but I can assure my noble friend that so long as he and those who act with him occupy seats in your Lordships' House there will be no doubt whatever that the blemishes of this Bill, if there be blemishes, will be brought before the notice of Parliament and will receive that attention which they deserve.
§ Transfer of functions of parish.
§ (2) Subject to the provisions of this Act, all the functions of the parish council of each landward parish and of each parish containing a landward part, so far as relating to the landward part— (c) under the Public Libraries (Scotland) Acts, 1887 to 1920; 18 shall be transferred to and vest in the district council (constituted as hereinafter provided) for the district so far as the functions relate to the district, and any statutory provision empowering a parish council to which this subsection applies to make a representation shall be construed as empowering the district council of the district to which the representation relates to make the representation.
§ THE PAYMASTER-GENERAL (THE EARL OF ONSLOW) moved, in subsection (2), to leave out paragraph (c). The noble Earl said: My Lords, I think that the various Amendments which the Government have suggested with regard to this part of the Bill are acceptable to noble Lords and therefore it is hardly necessary for me to detain your Lordships by explaining thorn. This is a drafting Amendment and unless discussion should arise upon it I think I need not trouble your Lordships with any observations regarding it.
§ Provisions relating to or consequential on transfers of functions.
§ (2) Any reference to the chairman or other member of a parish council in the constitution of any trust (except where the trust relates to a function transferred by this Act to a district council) shall be construed as a reference to a member appointed by the county council or the town council of the large burgh to which functions of the parish council are transferred by this Act, and where functions of a parish council are transferred to two or more such councils then any such reference to the chairman or other member of the parish council shall be construed as a reference to a member appointed by such of the councils concerned as the councils may agree, or failing agreement, as the Department of Health may determine. In the case of any trust relating to a function transferred to a district council the foregoing provisions shall apply with the substitution of district councils for county councils and other necessary modifications.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved, in subsection (2), after the first "trust," to insert "or other body whether corporate or not." The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is a drafting Amendment, designed to make it clear that this subsection applies in the case of a body such as the Royal Asylum of Montrose.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved, after subsection (2), to insert:— (3) Where in the constitution of any trust or other body whether corporate or not, provision is made for the appointment as trustees or members of the governing body of one or more members of a district board of control whose functions are by this Act transferred to two or more transferee authorities, the General Board of Control for Scotland may, after consultation with the trustees or governing body by order provide for the transferee authorities concerned jointly or a joint committee thereof or for the transferee authorities severally nominating trustees or members of the governing body in place of the members of the district board of control, and the constitution of the trust or other body shall have effect subject to the provisions of any such order.
§ The noble Earl said: My Lords, this Amendment is designed to meet a case such as that of the Royal Asylum at Montrose, where, under the constitution, the district board of control has a right to appoint representatives to the governing body. The district board will now disappear and its functions are transferred to two separate authorities, the County Councils of Angus and Kincardine. The Amendment authorises the General Board of Control to provide that the appointment of these representatives shall be made either by the two county councils jointly or by a joint committee; or so many appointments may be given to the one county council and so many to the other. The subsection is on similar lines to subsection (2) of this clause. This is almost a drafting Amendment.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved to add to the clause:— (7) Any provision in any Act of Parliament, deed, regulation or other document whereby only persons who are or are qualified to be commissioners of supply shall be eligible for appointment to any office shall have effect as if such limitation were omitted. The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is really a drafting Amendment, consequential upon the abolition of Commissioners of Supply. I beg to move.
My Lords, I beg to move, in proviso (ii) in subsection (1), to leave out "education authority."
My Lords, I want to ask for an explanation of this. Why are the words "education authority" to be left out?
My Lords, the reason why these words are left out is that, after very careful consideration, it was found that they were quite unnecessary.
§ Transfer of officers and superannuation funds.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved, in subsection (1) after paragraph (d), to insert: (e) Any officer who was the chief constable of a small burgh immediately before the commencement of this Act may decline to become an officer of the transferee authority and any such officer who shall so decline shall be entitled to compensation without regard being had to any offer of employment in the police force of the transferee authority, and any such officer who shall accept office under the transferee authority shall, notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (2) of the said section twenty-seven, hold office on such terms and conditions as that authority may determine.
§ The noble Marquess said: My Lords, a transferee authority might offer employment to an officer otherwise than as chief constable, since there will be only exceptional cases in which they can offer employment in that capacity. As the terms and conditions of a subordinate post cannot be quite the same as those of a chief constable, it is fair that the officer should have the option of retiring on compensation as an alternative to accepting a subordinate position. If he chooses to accept a post under the transferee authority, he should, however, be precluded from demanding thereafter that the post should be held on the same terms and conditions as his previous post, and the last part of the proposed new subsection secures this. This is not an Amendment in which I take a particular interest, but I hope that your Lordships will be satisfied with this explanation.
My Lords, may I ask whether the compensation is still to be paid if he gets employment with an authority other than the transferee authority?
My Lords, I am extremely sorry to say that I am not able to answer that question straight off. This is a small but rather intricate matter and, if my noble friend will allow me, I will let him know exactly how it stands, and should there be any- 22 thing that still requires to be done I will see that it is properly looked to on the Third Reading.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved, in subsection (1), at the beginning of paragraph (g), to insert "Except where the transferee authority or in the case of a claim for compensation the compensating authority in any particular case otherwise determine." The noble Earl said: My Lords, paragraph (g) of subsection (1) provides that, on the transfer of an officer or on a claim for compensation by an officer not taken over, no account is to be taken of any increase of salary after November 12, 1928. when the Bill was introduced, unless the increase is given under a previous agreement or relates to superannuation. This was to prevent increases being given by local authorities, such as parish councils who are going out of existence, merely for the purpose of improving the position of officers under this Bill. It has been felt, however, that as it stands the paragraph is too restrictive, for it would exclude account being taken of an increase given in the ordinary course of administration, though not in accordance with a previous agreement.
§ The proposed Amendment will permit the transferee authority—or, where the question is a claim for compensation, the compensating authority—to take account of the increase if they think proper. The provision was scarcely necessary in the case where an officer is taken over, for then the transferee authority could agree to pay the officer what salary they thought proper and thus take account of the increase, but in a case of compensation it would have been illegal for them to pay compensation on the basis of the increased salary without this Amendment.
My Lords, I have two or three Amendments immediately following upon the Paper that deal with this matter, but in the circumstances I will not move them but will accept the noble Earl's Amendment. It is not quite what I want—the Government never do quite what I want—but I am afraid that there is no chance of their doing anything different, and for once there is not very much between us. In the circumstances 23 I shall be pleased to agree to this Amendment, and I shall not move my own Amendments.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved, in subsection (1), at the end of paragraph (h), to insert:— Provided that where a claim for compensation is made by a person who, while employed by a local authority in an office the employment in which is ordinarily regarded as full time employment also held another office under a local authority and the claim is based on the loss only of the last mentioned office account shall not be taken of service in the first mentioned office. The noble Earl said: My Lords, as this paragraph stands, where a teacher in a country school, with perhaps thirty years' service, is appointed clerk to the parish council, say two years ago, and under this Bill loses his post as clerk to the parish council, he would be entitled to have his service in his post as a teacher reckoned for calculating his compensation for the loss of the clerkship, because his employment as teacher is ordinarily regarded as full-time employment. This would not be proper, and this Amendment secures that in such a case his compensation will be determined by his service as clerk to the council and not as teacher.
The three Amendments to this clause standing in my name are verbal Amendments.
§ Schemes for administration of functions.
§ (5) Every administrative scheme relating to education made by the council of a county within which a large burgh is included for the purpose of education shall, 24 unless the county council and the town council of the large burgh otherwise agree, make provision whereby for the purpose of the medical inspection, supervision, and treatment of the children attending the schools within the burgh the county council shall utilise to such extent, and on such terms and conditions as the councils agree or, failing agreement, as the Department of Health determine, the medical and nursing staff of the town council and the clinics and hospitals, under the control of that council, and every such scheme, which shall be made by the county council, and approved by the department only after consultation with the town council, shall be binding upon the town council.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved, in subsection (5), to leave out the words at the end, "and every such scheme, which shall be made by the county council, and approved by the Department only after consultation with the town council, shall be binding upon the town council," and to insert "The county council before making any such scheme and the Department before approving any such scheme shall consult with the town council, and any such scheme, when so approved, shall be binding on the town council." The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is a drafting Amendment.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved, after subsection (6), to insert:— (7)In any case where the Public Libraries Acts are in operation within any part of the landward area of a county, the administrative scheme of the county council relating to education may provide for the administration of the said Acts throughout the areas within which they are in operation being under the general supervision of the education committee, for the appointment as a library committee for each of the said areas of the district council of the district or of a committee consisting to the extent of not less than one-third and not more than one-half of persons who, not being members of the education committee, are resident within the area, and for the functions of the committees under the said Acts being exercised by the education committee or the library committees as specified in the scheme, and where the scheme makes such provision as aforesaid the provisions of the Public Libraries Acts relating to the appointment of committees shall not apply. 25 The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is another of the Public Libraries Amendments, and I do not think I need go into it. Your Lordships have accepted the principle.
§ Payment by county councils of travelling expenses, &c.
§ 17.—(1) It shall be lawful for a county council to incur expenditure in paying allowances at uniform rates to be prescribed by order made by the Secretary of State in respect of travelling and other personal expenses necessarily incurred and time necessarily lost from ordinary employment by members of the council or of any committee or sub-committee thereof in attending meetings of such council, committee or sub-committee.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved, in subsection (1), to omit the words "at uniform rates to be prescribed by order made by the Secretary of State," and to insert "at rates not exceeding those set out in the…Schedule to this Act." The noble Marquess said: My Lords, I have an Amendment to this clause, and your Lordships will remember that the particular provision in the clause excited a good deal of interest when the Bill was in Committee—so much interest that upon a Division it was saved only by a very fortunate occurrence. The Government were, of course, very much impressed by the strong feeling displayed in your Lordships' House in respect of this matter. During the debate in Committee I tried to mitigate the criticism by explaining what was the present position in respect of the education committee, because your Lordships are aware that this provision, which the Government now propose should be applied to county councillors generally, has existed for a great many years in respect of the education committee, and a certain practice has grown up, and certain decisions of the Law Courts have followed, and these, of course, will apply to the extension of the provision which we are seeking to carry into effect.
§ Perhaps it was my fault, but at any rate many of your Lordships were not altogether satisfied, and I think that there was a certain feeling that the pre- 26 cise state of the case had not been made absolutely clear. I hope, with the assistance of this Amendment, and the explanation which I am going to try to give, that I shall now be able to make the position clear. In the first place, the working of this relief, as the law stands, in respect of the education committee, depends upon the decision for the time being of the Secretary of State, and it was suggested to us that however great the confidence may be which is placed in the present Secretary of State for Scotland, it does not follow that always his successors will enjoy the same confidence. In order to meet that feeling of apprehension, we propose to put the scale upon which this remuneration is possible into the Act of Parliament, so that it shall no longer be at the mercy of the Secretary of State for the time being. Consequently, the first change effected by this Amendment, which I hope you will read in conjunction with the new schedule, is to make the scale statutory instead of being subject to the Secretary of State. The scale deals with maximum rates in three divisions—the travelling expenses of the councillor, other personal expenses of the councillor, and the compensation for time necessarily lost—and might I point out that the effect of putting it into the Act of Parliament and schedule is that it cannot be altered except by another Act of Parliament? It is absolutely secured.
§ The schedule as it is set out in the Amendment Paper before the House, gives the scale which is now worked for the education committees. I said just now that this provision had been the subject of judicial interpretation, and there is a judgment in the Scottish Courts which limits the subject matter of this compensation. It is not compensation, that is to say, which can be paid to anybody who alleges that he has lost time by coming to do his duty on the county council. It must be a definite loss, and it is on a very moderate scale, because your Lordships will observe in the schedule that the figures are very small figures; but even those very small figures cannot be paid except in respect of actual loss due to the time which has been expended.
§ I should like to call your Lordships' attention to the judgment of the Court 27 of Session. It was given in respect of certain proceedings of the Glasgow Education Authority. It appears that the Glasgow Education Authority tried to pay compensation to a physician and surgeon for his time lost as a member of the committee, to an accountant and property agent, to a minister of religion and to a manufacturing stationer. I am troubling your Lordships with details in order to show to the House what the Court decided was inadmissible. In respect of all those four gentlemen whom the Glasgow authority tried to compensate the Court held that they had acted ultra vires. They could not do it because it could not be shown that any one of those gentlemen had lost a definite sum in consequence of the time which had been expended in doing their public duty.
Can the noble Marquess give us the name of that Scottish case?
I am sorry I cannot give it. The case was heard in 1920 and the judgment was delivered by the Lord President of the Court of Session. Perhaps your Lordships will allow me to read a passage from his judgment:— In some employments the withdrawal of a man from his duties involves him in necessary or unavoidable loss. This would be clearly so in the case of a miner, who must observe his shift, and who cannot go clown the pit at his appointed time if he has to attend the meeting of the education authority. In his case the time spent in attendance is necessarily lost and the wage for the shift is irrecoverable. Possibly the same might be said of a man who was paid by the piece, and who could only pursue his trade within the hours during which his master's workshop was open. In other kinds of employment, in the case of the shopkeeper and in professional vocations of all sorts, I do not say that it would be impossible in any instance to show that the withdrawal of a man from his work during part of his ordinary working day causes him a necessary loss, but it is certainly not enough, to establish a necessary loss of remunerative time, merely to say, as is said here, that the clergyman is in charge of a cure, or the medical man is conducting a practice or that the accountant is practising his profession. In the case of the clergyman it seems to be almost certain, and in the case of the others it seems to be exceedingly probable, that the sacrifice of income is not a necessary concomitant of the loss of certain hours of the day. 28 So that it was established by this judgment that there must be a necessary loss.
I must not, of course, say that it could only apply to wage earners because it might be quite possible for any of your Lordships, by the exercise of a very special ingenuity, to construct cases of men who are not wage earners who have lost definite sums of money by their attendance to public duties. But, broadly, following on this judgment of the Court of Session, it follows that those cases would be very rare, and what really is the question is simply the loss suffered by wage earners. The instance given by the Lord President of the Court of Session was that of the miner, who, if he had to go to the county council meeting, could not go down the pit, and therefore lost his day's wage. In such cases the operation of the provisions of the Bill would take effect. However distasteful it may be to us—and I think it is distasteful to a great many of us—that there should be any infringement of the wholesome practice that public work should be unpaid, yet that is not consistent with obtaining the services of members of the working class upon public bodies. They may, of course, be paid by their own fellows—they may be trade union officials. If they are in the enjoyment of a salary in that capacity which covers all this loss then they will not come within the terms of the Government Bill; but if a working man is elected to serve on a local body he cannot serve unless some provision is made, not only for his subsistence but for compensation for the time he loses. I admit most frankly that of all men in the House there is probably no man who regrets more than I do that there should be an infringement of this particular rule, but I find it very difficult to resist the logic. You invite the working classes to serve, and then you make it impossible for them to do so. That really cannot be easily sustained.
It is quite true that you ought to be very careful: you ought to limit the compensation, as we limit it in the schedule; you ought to prevent the possibility, owing to political pressure, of the Minister of the day enlarging the compensation; you ought, therefore, to enshrine it in the Act of Parliament itself. That we seek to do by this Amendment. Those two precautions are to be taken. And, of course, you ought to make the 29 actual sum of money very limited. Then, lastly, you ought to see that no compensation is given except to repay actual loss due to the fulfilment of a public duty by the working classes; and that is secured by the judgment of the Lord President of the Court of Session. I hope that for these reasons my noble friends who have an Amendment down on the Paper immediately following mine will not press that Amendment, that they will accept the effort which the Government have made to meet them as far as is possible consistently with the main object in view, and will allow the Government to put this Amendment into the Bill, and be content with having achieved at any rate that moderate end.
My Lords, I am entirely in agreement with the noble Marquess that it is better to have a provision of this kind in a statutory form than to leave it as a matter of regulation from time to time. So I think it is an improvement on the Bill that we should have this statutory new schedule in preference to such regulations.
May I interrupt the noble Lord to say that the name of the case I referred to is the Glasgow Education Authority versus the Scottish Education Department, 1922 Sessions Cases.
I am much obliged, and I assent, of course, to the view of the case which the noble Marquess has stated. But there is one point on which I entirely differ from him. We may both equally like voluntary service, but there is no infringement of voluntary service, or of the unselfish action involved in voluntary service, in providing the possibility of attendance to carry out that duty to a poor man who otherwise could not attend at all. To suggest that that is payment for voluntary service is, I think, a misunderstanding of the whole position. He is no more paid than the man who can afford to go in his motor car or in a first-class carriage on the railway to a particular meeting. He does not get a farthing for his work. All he gets is a payment—which I hope will be 30 adequate, though the noble Marquess has shown that it may be cut down to a very low figure—to enable him to carry out out the public duties which he has been elected to perform, and that, I think, is a very important matter. One other question I should like to ask the noble Marquess. This is a maximum schedule. In the Scottish education case to which he has referred, is the provision the maximum or an actual amount?
The case took place upon the existing schedule applying by Order in Council to the education committees. That is exactly the same as the one which appears in the Amendments to the Bill.
I am obliged to the noble Marquess. If that is so, I think the form is right. I was not sure whether that was an actual or a maximum schedule. I sincerely hope that the proposed Amendment may be inserted and I certainly think it ought to deal with all the difficulties.
My Lords, I should like to thank the noble Marquess the Leader of the House for what he has said in connection with this Amendment. I should like also to be the first to thank him for having in effect in this Amendment done everything that we, or I think any one else, asked him to do with regard to this point on the Committee stage. With regard to the consequential Amendment to which the noble Marquess referred, I find myself in complete agreement with him and I equally regret that there should be any question of payment for these men on local authorities. What I regret so much about this is the way in which it has crept into the Bill. As I understand it, it did not come in spontaneously from the Government but was forced upon them by the declared opinion of members in another place. One of the arguments advanced as to why this payment must be made is that education authorities in Scotland have been paid for some years now, and it has been put to me that this is one of those unfortunate relics of the Coalition Government. If that is the case, I regret more than ever that this relic is not only to be continued but, as I understand, to be enlarged.
In view of what the noble Marquess has said, and of the extent to which he 31 has given way to us, with his usual courtesy, on the Amendment which he has just moved, the Amendment standing in the name of Lord Lamington, Viscount Novar and myself will not be moved to-day. I should like to say, however, how bitterly many of us regret that there has crept into the scheme of local government in Scotland a system of payment which is considered necessary in Scotland, owing to the action of the Coalition Government, but which does not apply to the English Bill.
My Lords, I should like to point out that once you admit the principle that a person may be recompensed for time lost, it is no use saying that he is only to receive 7s. 6d., 15s. or some other amount. As sure as I am standing here that will be enlarged once you admit the principle.
§ Provided that, except so far as the Secretary of State by order so directs, this subsection shall not apply to water rates leviable under the provisions of any local Act, which water rates shall continue to be leviable as separate rates.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved, at the end of subsection (1), to insert:— and (b) where statutory provision is made in the case of any lands and heritages for a total or partial exemption from any rate included in the consolidated rate, the Secretary of State may, on the application of the rating authority or of any person interested, by order, provide that in lieu of such exemption only such portion of the consolidated rate as is specified in the order shall be leviable in respect of the said lands and heritages and the statutory provision shall have effect subject to the provisions of any such order.
§ The noble Earl said: My Lords, this Amendment wants a little explanation. It is intended to meet a case which has 32 arisen and is not altogether uncommon under certain Local Acts in Scotland. Under some of those Local Acts premises are exempted from the ordinary town council rates but they have to pay the education, parish and lunacy rates. In such cases, under the Local Acts, the provisions of this clause as they stand in the Bill would be rather difficult to apply. You would have to ascertain what would have been the amount of education, parish and lunacy rates which would otherwise have been payable and for that purpose to allocate a portion of the block grant under Part III of the Bill to those services. As your Lordships are aware, the block grant is given for general local services and not for special ones, and it is undesirable in principle to earmark it for particular services. Therefore, it is thought that the proper course is to make provision whereby there should be payable in respect of the premises only a specified proportion of the consolidated rate. That proportion will correspond as nearly as may be to what has been the proportion which the rates per pound payable from the premises bear to the total rates per pound payable on other premises in the area. Thus, for example, if the education, parish and lunacy rates amounted to 5s. in the £ and the municipal rates to 6s. in the £ then the Order under this Amendment could provide that the portion of rates payable from these subjects would be 5/11ths of the consolidated rate.
§ Provisions relating to district councils.
§ (5) Where the Public Libraries (Scotland) Acts, 1887 to 1920, are in operation within a parish or part of a parish included within the district of a district council, the said Acts shall be deemed to have been adopted throughout the whole of the said district.
§ (6) The special parish rate leviable under Part IV of the Act of 1894 shall after the commencement of this Act be termed the district council rate, and all expenses falling to be met by a district council, whether under Part IV of the Act of 1894 or otherwise, including expenses of determining as to the adoption of the Public Libraries (Scotland) Acts, 1887 to 1920, where these Acts are not adopted, shall be defrayed out of the district council rate and the provi- 33 sions of the said Public Libraries (Scotland) Acts so far as inconsistent herewith shall cease to have effect.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved to leave out subsection (5). The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is another of the Amendments relating to public libraries, and I beg to move.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved, in subsection (6), to omit all words after "otherwise" and to insert "shall be defrayed out of the district council rate." The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is an Amendment of a similar character. I beg to move.
§ Medical officers of health and sanitary inspectors.
§ 35.—(1) On any vacancy arising after the commencement of this Act in the post of medical officer of health being the officer of the town council of a small burgh then, unless in any particular case the Department of Health otherwise agree, the medical officer of health being the officer of the county council of the county within which the burgh is situate, shall be appointed to the post, and the town council of such burgh shall pay to the county council such proportion of the salary and expenses of such officer as the county council and the town council may agree, and, failing agreement, as may be determined by the Department.
§ (2) Except with the sanction of the Department of Health, no person shall, after the commencement of this Act, be appointed sanitary inspector of a county or burgh unless he possesses such qualifications as may be prescribed by the Department of Health.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved, at the beginning of subsection (1), to leave out "On any vacancy arising" and to insert "Where there is a vacancy at or." The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is a drafting Amendment to ensure that the provisions of this clause apply to a vacancy which has not been filled at the 34 commencement of the Act as well as to a vacancy arising after that date. I beg to move.
§ ".On a vacancy arising after the commencement of this Act in the office of medical officer of health or sanitary inspector of a small burgh, the medical officer of health or sanitary inspector, as the case may be, of the county within which the burgh is situated shall ipso facto become the medical officer of health or sanitary inspector for the burgh, and such proportion of the salaries and expenses of such officer as the county council and the town council may agree shall be paid by the town council to the county council, and, failing agreement, as may be determined by the Department of Health."
§ The noble Viscount said: My Lords, I move this Amendment in order to introduce into this clause the post of the sanitary inspector as well as the medical officer of health. It is a very important thing that county sanitary inspectors in Scotland should in similar circumstances be always the sanitary inspectors of the small burghs. In that way you would get a very much better official, a man of higher standing, of greater capacity and all the rest of it, as well as a much more independent man. He would be unlikely, for instance, to favour a row of houses belonging to the chief magistrate because he happened to be the chief magistrate. I do not know whether the Government are prepared to accept this new clause; or whether I should move the insertion of the words "or sanitary inspector" after "medical officer of health" in the second line of the existing clause and the same Amendment would be made a few lines further on. I do not know whether I dare move that, so I move the new clause as it stands to see what my noble friend Lord Onslow has to say about it.
As I understand it the noble Viscount would like me to put the Amendment as it stands on the Paper.
Does the noble Viscount wish to save an alternative Amendment?
I do not know whether it is in order on the Report stage to move such an Amendment without notice?
Then I would certainly like to move it. The general Amendment would come at the end of line 22 on Page 44, after "medical officer of health" to add "or sanitary inspector," and also a few lines further down.
I will put the Question in relation to the first two lines of the clause.
My Lords, I think the two Amendments which my noble friend has proposed really come to the same thing, but perhaps your Lordships would permit me to give a little explanation of the clause as it stands, because I think, from what my noble friend said, it is not quite clear to some of your Lordships. The case in regard to the medical officer of health has been decided by your Lordships, who have accepted the principle which is laid down in the Bill, but in regard to the sanitary inspector rather different considerations present themselves. In some of the smaller burghs of Scotland at the present time only a very small sum is available for the payment of the sanitary inspector, and the consequence is that the sanitary inspector very often is a person who has not the qualifications which are laid down in subsection (2) of this clause. The object of that is to ensure that all sanitary inspectors shall be thoroughly qualified persons. In a burgh which has a sanitary inspector of its own two sanitary inspectors would be concerned with the health services of the burgh. The county sanitary inspector would be concerned with the major sanitary services and the burgh sanitary inspector would 36 be concerned with the minor sanitary services, one being the matter of lodging-houses.
It has been represented very strongly in Scotland by many of the smaller burghs that it is eminently desirable that they should have a sanitary inspector to themselves, and those which have made this representation most strongly are the burghs which are seaside resorts. For instance, I could quote St. Andrews, one of the smaller burghs which is also a great University town and is familiar to most of your Lordships who are accustomed to resort there to play golf. It is also a holiday town to a great extent, because the University is not in session all the year. During the winter months there are not so many people in the town as there are during the holiday season, and therefore it seems to the authorities in St. Andrews to be desirable that a sanitary inspector should be available for the services of the town council. Another burgh of the same kind is Rothesay, which is a holiday town. It has been represented that the services of a sanitary inspector should be available also in Rothesay, but if the burgh is to maintain a sanitary inspector he will have to be a qualified man. It will be impossible for him to be an unqualified man—a plumber or someone like that. He must be a man qualified for the work as laid down in subsection (2). Supposing a burgh wishes to have a sanitary inspector but cannot afford to pay for a qualified man, then, obviously, it must come to an arrangement.
It does not say so in the clause.
No, but if they must have a qualified man they would necessarily come to some arrangement with the county.
But he may not be necessarily the county sanitary inspector.
In all probability he would be the county inspector, but I do not say it is absolutely necessary that he should be. That is not in the clause. But in all probability if a qualified man is required, it would be the county inspector, and it would come about by arrangement with the county. That is the consideration I have to put before your Lordships, and I hope you 37 will accept the Bill as it stands, because there is great feeling in these small but important burghs that they should be given the right to maintain their separate sanitary inspectors, and it is proposed that they should be able to do so so long as the inspector is a qualified man.
My Lords, St. Andrews, which has been referred to by the noble Earl, is not a typical small burgh at all. There are plenty of small burghs with sanitary inspectors and to my mind it is absolutely essential that the sanitary inspector should be a county official. The work of the medical officer and the sanitary inspector is interlaced and interwoven. They constantly have to carry out their duties together, and if they are appointed by two different authorities and under the control of two different authorities there is bound to be friction. I have had experience for nearly thirty years as chairman of a county council, and if I do not know something about local government in Scotland, I ought to know something. I hope the Government will accept this most important: Amendment, upon which the county councils in Scotland lay particular stress.
My Lords, I also regret that the Government are not going to accede, to this Amendment. I agree with my noble friend who has just sat down that it is most essential for efficient administration that this Amendment should be accepted. The health of the public throughout the county, including the burghs, should be the first consideration and should come before any susceptibilities that there may be. It is perfectly well known that there have been cases in the past where the medical officer and the sanitary inspector have been at loggerheads and the result has been, if not disastrous, at all events very unsatisfactory. Although one is very sorry for these small burghs, I feel in the interests of the public in counties, but especially in the burghs themselves, that there should be the advantage which this Amendment would give and I hope the Government will see their way to accept it.
My Lords, my noble friend who has just spoken has said, and said truly, that what is of supreme importance is that 38 these sanitary services should be carried out by a competent man. But that is provided. No man henceforth is to be appointed who has not got a proper certificate. The kind of case which my noble friend hints at, which I cannot pretend I am personally familiar with, will henceforth be made absolutely impossible, because no one can hold this position unless he is qualified by having received a certificate showing his qualifications. Therefore, the particular difficulty suggested would be at an end. I admit that the resulting position will not be wholly satisfactory, but I would like to point out that even if my noble friend's Amendment were carried the position would not be wholly satisfactory either, because the proper relation between the sanitary inspector and the medical officer is one of subordination. The sanitary inspector ought to be under the medical officer, but he would not be under him for all purposes even if my noble friend's Amendment is passed. It is one of the unsatisfactory positions of the general law of Scotland in this one respect that, even were the Amendment carried, the sanitary inspector would not for all purposes be under the medical officer of health.
I mention this because it bears upon the discussion we had at the beginning of the evening's proceedings. My noble friend Lord Novar asked me whether hereafter this Bill would not be the subject of amendment I think it quite fair to say that in process of time probably those interested in Scottish legislation will see that the sanitary inspector is placed for all purposes under the medical officer of health. When that time comes, probably, it will be a very good opportunity for the general reconsideration of the position. I hope I have said something to show, in the first place, that we have met part of the difficulty, and, in the second place, that the position is not wholly satisfactory anyhow, and ought to be the subject hereafter probably of fresh legislation.
My Lords, I would suggest to the noble Marquess that if you are to have a sanitary inspector in one of the smaller burghs with the qualifications necessary in the case of a man occupying such a position the burgh will not be able to pay the necessary salary.
Then they will have to make him a county council man.
It does not say so in the clause. That is my objection to it. It ought to be so expressed, and if it were so expressed I would withdraw my Amendment.
§ Amendment of the Public Libraries Acts.
§ ".—(1) The Public Libraries Acts shall not be adopted in a landward parish or the landward part of a parish except with the sanction of the county council.
§ (2) Every estimate of sums required by a committee under the Public Libraries Acts shall be subject to the approval of the town council or county council as the case may be."
§ populations varying between 20,000 and 30,000 at certain periods of the year, makes any difference at all in the matter of whether they should employ a sanitary inspector whole time or not. I hope Viscount Younger will press the Amendment, if only for the assistance of county councils. In deciding between different sanitary inspectors it is very desirable that there should be one for the whole of every county.
§ On Question, Whether the words "Where there is a vacancy at or after the commencement of this Act in the post of medical officer of health" shall stand part of the Bill?
§ Their Lordships divided:—Contents, 20; Not-Contents, 33.
Hailsham, L. (L. Chancellor.) Onslow, E. Danesfort, L.
Salisbury, M. (L. Privy Seal.) Stanhope, E. Ernle, L.
Denbigh, E. Hood, V. Kylsant, L.
Iddesleigh, E. Peel, V. Templemore, L.
Lucan, E. [Teller.] Wraxall, L.
Reading, M. Falkland, V. Fairfax of Cameron, L.
Leven and Melville, E. Banbury of Southam, L. Remnant, L.
Mar and Kellie, E. Belhaven and Stenton, L. Sandhurst, L.
Midleton, E. Blythswood, L. Sempill, L.
Morton, E. Carson, L. Sinclair, L.
Bertie of Thame, V. Dynevor, L. Strachie, L.
On Question, proposed new clause agreed to.
§ The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is a new clause which gives effect to the Public Libraries Amendments, and I do not think I need explain it to your Lordships as it has already been indicated that it is acceptable.
§ Rateable value of industrial or freight transport lands and heritages.
§ (3) For the purposes of this Part of this Act Salmon Net Fishings shall be deemed to be industrial lands and heritages.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved to leave out subsection (3). The noble Marquess said: My Lords, I hope your Lordships will allow me in moving this Amendment to discuss the Amendment which stands in my name upon Clause 45. The Amendment which I now move is to leave out the provision which was inserted by your Lordships in Committee. It would not, of course, be respectful to the House to ask your Lordships to reverse a decision which you made in Committee were it not that I am able to recommend to your Lordships at the same time an Amendment which I hope will meet the legitimate wishes of those who carried the Amendment in Committee. Accordingly I hope your Lordships will allow me to discuss now my Amendment to add a subsection to Clause 45. I propose, if your Lordships are willing, to insert in that clause the words printed on the Paper.
§ The difficulty which the Government felt during the debate in Committee was that we had rot then found any means of distinguishing between the catching of salmon commercially and the catching of salmon for purely sporting purposes. I do not think that any of your Lordships desired derating in respect of purely sporting salmon fishing, but it was contended in Committee—and, I must say, contended with great force—that there was no reason why this particular industry of commercial salmon-catching should not be treated like other industries and derated. As soon as the debate was over the Government set themselves to work to see if it were possible to find a distinction between these two classes of fishing that would hold water, and I think we have achieved that end. The result is to be found in paragraph (a) of my proposed new subsection in Clause 45. I will not, of course, deal now with paragraph (b) of that Amendment, because it is not relevant to the clause before us.
§ So far as paragraph (a) is concerned, your Lordships will see that the commercial and sporting aspects of salmon fishing are distinguished. So long as we are dealing with nets which are regularly used throughout the legal period, there will be derating as in any other industry, but it is necessary to distinguish the case where nets are hired in order to promote sport—a very legitimate thing to do. Those who are interested in sport some- 42 times hire nets in order to put them out of action. It would not be fair that they should have derating, for it is done purely for sporting purposes. These people are distinguished from those who pursue the industry on a wholly commercial basis. The latter will be derated in accordance with the wishes of your Lordships. I gather from the way in which my observations are received that I have, on the whole, satisfied the House, and therefore I will leave the matter there.
My Lords, if I may take up your Lordships' time for two minutes, I should like first of all to thank the noble Marquess—since the noble Lord, Lord Lovat, who originally raised this matter, is not in the House at the moment—for the very generous way in which he has met us on this point. I should add that there is one concession which some of us had hoped to have obtained which is not to be found in the noble Marquess's Amendment to Clause 45. I refer to the question of salmon-fishing owners who reduce the number of nets in their fishing area in order to increase the stock of salmon which go up the river, and consequently the stock which may be caught in the nets in future years. This is not the case to which the noble Marquess has referred of those who remove nets in order to increase the value of rod fishing above. That is solely a matter of sporting rights and does not enter into our minds in this connection. I am referring merely to a method by which owners of fishery rights seek to increase their own profits in future years. We gather that the Government found it absolutely impossible to deal with this point, and accordingly we are satisfied with the noble Marquess's Amendment as it stands, and our thanks are due to him for the manner which he has treated us in this matter.
§ Amendment of 18 & 19 Geo. 5. c. 44.
§ 45. For the purposes of the Bating and Valuation (Apportionment) Act, 1923, lands and heritages shall not be deemed not to be occupied and used as a factory or workshop by reason only of the fact that the owner or occupier of the lands and herit- 43 ages is the only person working therein or that no other person working therein is in his employment.
(b) Minerals which are let notwithstanding that they are not being worked at the time."
§ The noble Marquess said: My Lords, I have already said all that I have to say about the part of this Amendment that deals with salmon fishings, but a word or two are due to your Lordships about paragraph (b) of the proposed new subsection, which deals with minerals. This is one of those dreadful cases to which I referred just now in which the Scottish and English Bills are not the same. In this respect Scotland is not so well off as England, and therefore it is necessary to move an Amendment. It may be said that primâ facie, where minerals are not worked, they are not entitled to derating, but when you come to consider the question carefully it is found that this is not quite a fair way of stating the case, because lands containing minerals, even if they are not worked, may be owned or occupied with a view to being worked hereafter, and therefore they are really part of the stock-in-trade, as it were, of the industry and ought not to be rated any more than the actual workings of minerals. It might happen, for example, that the minerals were under the land of several owners. If they were under the land of a single owner and the hiring of them was one transaction, there would be derating, as matters stand, whether they were worked or not; but if they came under several owners, so that a different bargain had to be struck in the case of each owner, then, unless this Amendment were inserted, although they all really formed part of the same enterprise, the minerals which were not worked would not come within the benefits of the Bill. 44 For these reasons, and in order, so far as is possible, to put Scotland in the same position as England in this respect, we have drafted this Amendment.
My Lords, while thanking the noble Marquess for meeting the case of minerals, I really rise to ask what the word "cruive" conveys to your Lordships. I happen to be the representative of net fishermen on one of the English rivers and I think I know all the nets used by fishermen there, but this word is unknown, I imagine, on this side of the Border, and I should like to know exactly how we are legislating in the case of Scotland and to be informed what the word really means.
The nearest English equivalent is "trap."
§ Adjustments as to rating relief between landlords and tenants.
§ 46.—(1) Every occupier of agricultural lands and heritages occupying under a lease entered into prior to the first day of June, nineteen hundred and twenty-eight, shall be entitled, on the fifteenth day of May in each year to recover from the owner thereof by retention out of rent or otherwise a sum equal to the amount of the owner's share of the rates in respect of such lands and heritages payable for the year beginning on the sixteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and thirty, multiplied by two and one-half.
§ VISCOUNT NOVAR moved, in subsection (1), after "each year," to insert "on producing the discharged demand note for the occupier's share of the rates in respect of such lands and heritages for the year ended on the said date." The noble Viscount said: My Lords, this Amendment is very much desired by local authorities in the Highlands, or at any rate by leading representatives of them who have spoken to me on the subject, and it was at their instance that I put it down. I think, also, it has been brought to the notice of the Government. The reason for this provision is that it will hasten up the payment of rates, and so save the local authorities interest on bank overdrafts. It will ensure the payment of the rates from a class of people who do not pay their fair share of the 45 rates as it is, and the amount which these people pay is so small that it is not worth while prosecuting them. Every inducement should therefore be applied to make them pay their rates voluntarily, and of course I need hardly remind your Lordships that failure to pay rates by any section of the community must increase the burden of rates upon those who do pay.
My Lords, I cannot help thinking that for once, and it is only for once, my noble friend has moved an Amendment under a misapprehension. Will he consider again what it is that this clause actually means? I admit that under the original clause as it reached this House there was some reason for misunderstanding. Under the original clause as it reached this House the repayment by the landlord was to take place when the rate became due. That was the original provision, and upon the mere verbal language it might appear as if the repayment depended upon the due meeting of the obligation of the other party, the occupier-ratepayer. I think that was erroneous even as the clause stood, but one could understand how the difficulty arose. Now, in consequence of the very kind pressure which your Lordships put upon the Government, we have got rid of that phraseology and the whole thing takes place upon a fixed day, named in the Bill—I think it is the 15th of May. I think, therefore, there is no reason for any misunderstanding. This payment over of part of the rates relief by the landlord takes place on a fixed day, and it has nothing whatever to do with what the occupier does.
It is in order that in the transitional year the owner should not have too great a benefit from the relief which is being given by Parliament, that this is done. It is in order that he should not receive too great a benefit, and, I may add, should not suffer a great deal of odium in consequence, that this payment over of part of the relief to the occupier is prescribed by the Bill. What the occupier does, whether he pays his share of the rate or not, has nothing to do with it. 46 Why, because an occupier-ratepayer fails to do his duty, should his landlord be better off? Yet that is the effect of the Amendment. Supposing the occupier-ratepayer does not pay his rates, the landlord would be better off. Can there be anything more illogical than that? The owner receives very considerable benefit under the Bill, but we do not want him in the transitional year to receive too much. That, I conceive, is conceded by everybody in Parliament. He disburses part of the relief, and it has nothing to do with the matter what the occupier does in respect of his own duty. That is another matter altogether, and to say that wherever an owner is fortunate enough to have tenants who are blind to their public duty, then he should be better off, is reductio ad absurdum. It is an Amendment which cannot be accepted.
If I might reply to the noble Marquess, I never mentioned the landlord at all, and had no occasion to mention him. I had not put it from his point of view at all.
I was thinking of the effect of the Amendment.
My object in rising was to say that I did not put the Amendment at all from the point of view of the landlord or the tenant, but, having served for many years on local authorities in the Highlands, I know how impossible it is to collect the rates and how desirable it is to put every pressure you can upon these delinquents to make them pay their pittance. This is one way of doing it, and I still maintain it, and a number of my friends who take the lead on these bodies in the Highlands have urged me to put these Amendments down. I promised I would do so, and I am afraid that I must press the matter.
The other two Amendments in the name of the noble Viscount are, I believe, consequential.
§ Relief to occupiers of agricultural lands and heritages not to be taken account of for certain purposes.
§ 47. Neither the relief to occupiers of agricultural lands and heritages effected by this Act or by the Agricultural Rates Act, 1923, as amended by the Act of 1926, nor the amounts recoverable by occupiers from 47 owners under section forty-four of this Act, shall be taken into account by the Land Court in fixing a fair or equitable rent for a holding under the Small Landholders (Scotland) Acts, 1886 to 1919, or by an arbiter in determining for the purposes of section twelve of the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act, 1923, what rent is properly payable in respect of a holding.
§ THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH moved to omit Clause 47. The noble Duke said. My Lords, in the Committee stage I moved the same Amendment, and the Leader of the House said he would be good enough to look into the matter. Several arbitrators who have looked at this clause have interpreted it in different ways, and lawyers do not seem to be able to understand it any better. I asked the Leader of the House to consider the matter, and he promised he would look into it between Committee and the present stage, and see whether possibly the Government could bring forward some Amendment which would be able to be understood by the ordinary arbitrator.
My Lords, this clause is really not a novelty at all. It is merely the re-enactment in the case of Scotland of a provision of the Agricultural Bates Act, 1923, which was passed through this House, I believe, so far as it concerns Scotland, by the noble Viscount behind the noble Duke. There are two clauses in the Agricultural Bates Act, 1923—Clause 5 and Clause 14, Clause 5 applied to England and Clause 14 to Scotland—both of which contained the provision that the remission of rates should not be taken into account by any arbitrator in fixing the rent. I know it has been said that this clause may be difficult to understand, or at any rate to apply. That is probably true, but it is part of the law of the country, and it would be a very strong measure if in passing this new Bill through we were to remove it. It is continued in the English Act—I think by Schedule 10—and this is the Scottish equivalent of it. I do not think any of your Lordships would seriously urge the Government to vary the law of Scotland in this respect.
Imagine for a moment what the effect outside would be if this clause were not passed, that is to say, if the opportunity were taken by the passage of this Bill 48 to change the law as it is in Scotland now. People would say at once that the object which the Government have in view is to "nobble" this rate relief in order to increase the landlord's rent. Though that might be very unfair, it is what would undoubtedly be said. I agree that, supposing it were not already the law in Scotland, there might be some question as to whether we should insert it for the first time now; but to strike it out of the law of Scotland when we are giving this extra relief would surely be to run the risk of misunderstanding in the public mind—and in the mind of a part of the public which it is most important should view this measure with satisfaction. I quite understand the difficulty which my noble friend the noble Duke has in imagining how this clause would actually work, but I hope your Lordships will not run the risk of the misunderstanding which would be caused by the course which he proposes.
I had no intention of pressing this Amendment to a Division, but I did hope that the Government would make it clearer, because I cannot entirely agree with my noble friend that this is the law. It is an alteration of the law, and it is not quite on all fours with the legislation for England. However. I beg leave to withdraw.
§ Provision as to valuation roll.
§ (3) The assessor of a county in making up the valuation roll of the county shall distinguish in the roll lands and heritages situated within the boundaries of each district of a district council.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved, at the beginning of subsection (3), to insert: "As from the sixteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and thirty." The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is to provide for the contingency that the districts of district councils will not be ascertained until the early part of 1930. Part II of the Bill comes into operation on May 16, 1929, and this Amendment provides that not until May 15, 1930, will the valuation roll have to distinguish the subjects situated within each district.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved to insert the following new subsection:— (4) For the purpose of any apportionment of expenses between rating authorities according to the valuation roll for the year beginning on the sixteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and twenty-nine, the rateable valuation of the area of a rating authority shall be ascertained as if the rateable value of agricultural lands and heritages in that roll had been ascertained in accordance with the provisions of section forty-three of this Act instead of in accordance with the provisions of section forty-nine of this Act; and there shall be included in the said valuation roll in the case of each area for the purposes of which lands and heritages situated therein require to be distinguished a note showing what the rateable valuation of the area would have been had the rateable value of the agricultural lands and heritages therein been ascertained in accordance with the said section forty-three.
§ The noble Marquess said: My Lords, I think an apology is due to your Lordships for this and the series of Amendments which follow, but they arise in consequence of the financial statement made by my right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in another place two days ago. One of the features of that statement is that the derating of agricultural land is to be advanced from October 1 to April 1 both in England and in Scotland, and changes therefore will be required. In the case of England a new Bill will be required, because the English Bill has already passed. But in the case of Scotland that will not be necessary if your Lordships and another place are good enough to consent to these Amendments, because these Amendments will embody the change which will have to be achieved in England by separate legislation The whole effect of this series of Amendments is merely to bring forward the date upon which agricultural relief will be granted in Scotland. That involves a number of consequential changes which these Amendments deal with, but they all really relate to the same point.
§ Perhaps I may say how it is to be achieved in the case of Scotland. There is once more one of these eternal difficulties of the difference of the law between England and Scotland, and what is concerned in the present case is the fact that the Scottish financial year is not the same as the English financial year. The English financial year begins on April 1: the Scottish financial year begins 50 on May 15. One way of dealing with the matter would have been simply to leave the fresh Scottish relief to begin on May 15, but the result would have been that Scotland would be done out of about six weeks of the relief which is accorded to England. Well, the Government would not look at that. Therefore very elaborate clauses have been constructed in order to bridge over this grave injustice, and there is to be a special arrangement for the present year so as to achieve it The way that is done is to alter the relief of rates from 87½ per cent. for this particular year to 92 per cent. I am not going to trouble your Lordships with the mathematical calculations under which that is to be justified; I am not capable of doing it, and I am sure your Lordships would be bored to death listening to it. But, in effect, if you change the figure for the present year from 87½ to 92 per cent. the trick is done, or done within a very small fraction which even the most meticulous critic would hardly be able to call in question.
§ That is what is achieved by these Amendments. But the present Amendment which I am actually moving is in order to prevent this change taking place in respect of one part of the subject—namely, the apportionment of expenses between rating authorities. There is really no reason why any change of percentage should take place in that particular case, and that has to be provided against. This, therefore, is what perhaps in Ireland might be called a consequential Amendment which comes in front. It is in order to prevent this consequence of the advancing of the date from affecting this particular part of the subject that this Amendment has to be inserted. The other Amendments which carry out the substantial change will follow. I beg to move.
My Lords, of course, we have had no opportunity of considering either this or the other Amendments, because they are not on the Paper.
They are all on the Paper, but they only appeared this morning.
At any rate, we have not had time to examine them. In the circumstances, of course, we accept what the noble Marquess has told us, and we assume that these Amendments will only have the effect of changing the date for the purpose of giving effect to what the Chancellor of the Exchequer said in another place in reference to the operation of derating in Scotland; but it may possibly be that we shall have to raise some points on the Third Reading after we have had time to consider the matter. May I ask the noble Marquess if it is intended to produce another Bill in the other House for the purpose of dealing with England during this present Session?
My Lords, it is true there has not been very much time to study these new Amendments, and I think the Government must have had considerable difficulty in framing them in the short time available. All I want to ask is that the Government should make quite sure between now and the Third Reading that the Amendments do carry out their intention.
My Lords, the matter, of course, is under very careful consideration. But although it was not possible for very well known reasons to convey to the public the proposed change, yet it has been in the mind of the Government for some time.
§ Commencement and provision for the year 1929–30.
(i) The rate of deduction from the gross annual value of agricultural lands and heritages shall be for the purposes of the owners' share of rates sixty-two and one-half per cent. and for the purposes of the occupiers' share of rates eighty-three and one-third per cent.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved, in paragraph (i), to leave out all words after "purposes" and to insert "both of the owner's and of the occupier's share 52 of rates, ninety-two per cent." The noble Marquess said: My Lords, I beg to move the Amendment which stands in my name on the Paper.
§ 68. For the purposes of this Part of this Act, any contribution made by the Crown in aid of rates in respect of any lands and heritages owned by the Crown or occupied by or on behalf of the Crown for public purposes shall be treated as money paid as rates, and in the case of agricultural, industrial and freight transport lands and heritages, the value upon which that contribution would if this Act had not been passed have been computed for the year beginning on the sixteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and twenty-nine, shall be treated as the unreduced rateable value of the lands and heritages and the value on which that contribution would have been computed for that year if this Act had been in operation throughout that year shall be treated as the reduced rateable value of the lands and heritages.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved, after the last "Act," to insert "except Section forty-nine." The noble Marquess said: My Lords, this Amendment is to make clear that in ascertaining the reduced rateable value of lands in the ownership or occupation of the Crown it is to be ascertained as if the provisions of the Act other than Section 49 had been in operation throughout the year. Section 49 is that which we have just been considering. The section deals with the abnormal position during the year 1929–30, and what we want to ascertain is what would be the reduced rateable value in the normal year. I beg to move.
§ Interpretation, of Part III.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved, in the definition of "reduced rateable value," after "Act" to insert "except Section forty-nine." The noble Marquess said: My Lords, I beg to move.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved, in the definition of "special rate," to leave out "a special parish rate or a library rate leviable within a landward area," and to insert "or a special parish rate." The noble Earl said: This is another Amendment with reference to public libraries. I beg to move.
§ Commencement and grants in respect of period beginning 1st October, 1929.
§ 74. This Part of this Act shall come into operation on the first day of October, nineteen hundred and twenty-nine, and as respects the period beginning on the said day and ending on the fifteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and thirty, there shall be paid out of moneys provided by Parliament to every authority levying rates in respect of the loss on account of rates of the authority for that period, a sum equal to five-eighths of the amount of the loss for the standard year calculated in accordance with the rules set out in Part I of the Sixth Schedule to this Act.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved to leave out all words before "there" and to insert "Save as otherwise expressly provided this Part of this Act shall come into operation on the sixteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and twenty-nine, and as respects the year beginning on the said day." The noble Marquess said: My Lord, I beg to move the Amendment that stands in my name on the Paper.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved to leave out all words after the second "rates" and to insert a sum equal to the amount estimated and certified as being the difference between the sum receivable by the authority as the proceeds of rates in respect of the said year and the sum which would have been so receivable bad the rateable value of the area of the authority been calculated as if this Act had not passed: Provided that if the Secretary of State is satisfied that the amount in the pound of the rates levied by any such authority in respect of the said year has been abnormally increased by reason of charges not ordinarily falling to be borne by rates having been imposed thereon, the sum payable to the authority under this section shall be such as may be estimated and certified as the sum which would have been so payable if the said amount in the pound had not been so increased as aforesaid.
§ The noble Marquess said: My Lords, I beg to move.
§ (5) Every order made under the immediately preceding subsection of this section or under subsection (2) of section two or subsection (1) of section seventeen or subsection (2) of section seventy of this Act shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament forthwith, and if an Address is presented to His Majesty by either House of Parliament within the next subsequent twenty-eight days on which that House has sat, after any such order is laid before it, praying that the order may be annulled, it shall henceforth be void, but without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done thereunder or the making of a new order.
§ (6) Any order made under this Act may be revoked or altered by a subsequent order.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved, in subsection (5), to leave out "or subsection (1) of Section seventeen." The noble Marquess said: My Lords, this really follows upon the change which has been made this evening in respect of the rates. The travelling rates are now fixed by the schedule. I beg to move.
§ THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH moved, after subsection (5), to insert the following new subsection:— (6) Every regulation made under subsection (2) of section seven of this Act shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament as soon as may be after it is made, and if an Address is presented to His Majesty by either House of Parliament within the next subsequent twenty-eight days on which that House has sat after any such regulation is laid before it praying that the regulation may he annulled it shall henceforth be void, but without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done thereunder or the making of a new regulation.
§ The noble Duke said: My Lords, I must apologise for not having put this Amendment on the Paper until a very late hour. Although the Amendment has been put down to Clause 75 it really refers to Clause 7 of the Bill. That clause deals with superannuation. The words in subsection (2) are "may modify or adapt the provisions of any Act of Parliament." It was brought up by my noble friend Lord Elgin and other of your 56 Lordships on this side of the House on Second Reading. On the Committee stage the Government moved Amendments to regulate some powers and to take away others. The only part of the Bill under which it seems that the Secretary of State will be able to modify or adapt the provisions of any Act of Parliament is Clause 7, subsection (2). The Amendment I am moving tries to remedy that and to put this part in the same position as the rest of the Bill regarding the powers of the Secretary of State.
§ I am sorry to say that the Amendment was only on the Paper about four o'clock this afternoon, and if the noble Marquess is not able to give me an answer at the moment I would ask him to be good enough to consider it between now and the Third Reading. I think, however, that the Amendments I have placed on the Paper—possibly the Government may be able to put them into a better form—put the Bill into a shape which really carries out their intention regarding these Acts of Parliament, as shown by the Amendments they moved on the Committee stage. I beg to move.
My Lords, my noble friend has been extremely courteous and has frankly admitted that it is extremely difficult for us on the spur of the moment to deal with an Amendment put down at such a late hour. I need not say that there is a great deal in my noble friend's Amendment which seems to me on the face of it to be quite reasonable, but sometimes when one comes to look at a thing difficulties are found which do not appear at first blush. Therefore, I am sure that my noble friend will not press his Amendment at present. I will take care to have the whole matter looked into between now and the Third Reading.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved to add the following new subsection: (7) This section shall come into operation on the sixteenth day of May, nineteen hundred and twenty-nine. The noble Marquess said: My Lords, this Amendment has to do with the advancing of the date, like the others. I beg to move.
§ Provided that nothing in this subsection shall apply to references to a parish in Part V of the Act of 1894 as respects parish trusts.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved to insert in subsection (1):—"'Public Libraries Acts' means the Public Libraries (Scotland) Acts, 1887 to 1920." The noble Earl said: My Lords, I beg to move the Amendment which stands in my name on the Paper.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY moved, after "'Rate' includes water rate," to insert "but does not include the fishery assessment levied under the Salmon Fisheries (Scotland) Act, 1862, and the Acts amending that Act under any corresponding provisions of a Local Act." The noble Marquess said: My Lords, derating does not apply to assessments under the Salmon Fisheries Act. I beg to move.
§ THE EARL OF ONSLOW moved to add to subsection (5) "or (b) in the provisions of the Public Libraries Acts, except those relating to the defraying of expenses incurred under the said Acts." The noble Earl said: My Lords, this is a further Public Libraries Amendment. I beg to move.

References: § 17

§ 35
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 

§ 45

§ 46

§ 47

§ 68

§ 74