[Continued

the note is to show the justification for extending all the provisions to the Poor Law Unions, which, as defined by the Interpretation Act, include several parishes which were made a Union under the Act of 1834, a single parish for which a Board of Guardians was provided under the Act of 1834, a union of parishes created by a local Act, and a single parish for which a Board of Guardians has been established by a local Act.

Mr. Neville.

43. That covers your point about parishes that you mention in your note, does it not? It takes them all in. In your note you talk about the fact that the original Acts deal with chargeability of parishes. That covers all that does it? No, that is a different point. This is justification for the use of the words "Poor Law Union " throughout the Bill.

Chairman.

44. You already point out in Sub-clause 3 a little difference as to coming into operation? The first point is the interpretation which is placed on Section 5 of the Act of 1870 by the Ministry of Health and their predecessors. The words two or more parishes in which the relief of the poor was administered by the Board of Guardians are taken by the Ministry to mean parishes which have been single parish unions. It does not apply to a case where two or more parishes have been taken out of unions and constituted a new union.

45. My own opinion is that that has been clearly explained in the note. I think we can adopt that without further observation?-Then there are two small changes. For the words, "upon the issue of the order," we have substituted the words, "upon the coming into operation of an order "; and for the words, "until the guardians of the new union come into office," we have put, " until the guardians for the union shall be completely elected."

46. I do not think we are going too far in consolidating in adopting that?—It makes it correspond to the practice.

Mr. Hudson.] You ought to make a note of the alteration. Chairman.] note of that.

60288

There will have to be a

Mr. Neville.

47. There are decisions which decide that practice, are there?-No, it is the practice of the Ministry. The old guardians go on acting till the others come into force. Otherwise you would have a hiatus with no one administering relief. Do you think it is necessary to have a note on that

Chairman.] We can settle that after

wards.

Mr. Hudson.] I think we ought to have a note. We are making an alteration-perhaps not exactly a change.

Chairman.] We will not settle that now, if you do not mind. It can be raised, if not settled earlier, on the draft report. You would see, for instance, if there was no note, and you would draw attention on the draft report that no note has been made on that.

Mr. Hudson.] Could we not have a record kept of the desirability as we go along, if anyone raises the question of desirability, and then we can consider that, instead of each one of us having to bring it up?

[Continued

52. There is a note on Clause 4; I think that it explains for us the difficulty. I think you left out County Councils. Is there not some difference about the power of County Councils to fix numbers?-There are concurrent powers of the Minister and County Councils to alter the number of members of the Boards of Guardians. As a matter of fact the Minister fixes them when the union is created or when the union is altered, and he leaves subsequent alterations to be effected by the County Council.

Sir Henry Slesser.

53. Is it not rather a pity if the matter is being codified, that this is not made clear; because in Clause 11 on page 6 you find the County Councils have power. I should have thought one might have made this definitive, showing what the powers are because at present there are alternative powers in Clause 11 and in Clause 4, and it is not clear that the Ministry's powers are limited to the first fixing? They are not. At the present moment they are concurrent powers.

Mr. Hudson.] Could we not get over it by leaving out the words, "fix or," in line 2 of Clause 11?

Sir Henry Slesser.] There is no reference to Clause 11 in Clause 4; therefore you have now got, I take it per incuriam really two bodies with powers simultaneously to fix different numbers.

Chairman.

54. Not per incuriam, I think?—Mr. Comyns will explain that. (Mr. Comyns.) Might I explain that the County Council power is ordinarily used to meet an increase of population. A parish increases and there is room for three guardians instead of two. That is a power which is ordinarily exercised by the County Council under Section 60. The power of the Minister is usually exercised when areas are altered, where a new union is

set up or where parishes are trans

ferred from one union to another. It is rather necessary there that the transferring order should specify the number of guardians to be elected. The two powers are really exercised in different cases. The County Council power is exercised in the case of an increase of rateable value, or something like that.

Sir Henry Slesser.] I appreciate the practice, but all I am pointing out is that, looking at this as a new measure which we wish to make as perfect as we can, it is not clear from the wording, and the powers appear to conflict if one were merely to look at the language without any explanation.

Lord Warrington.

55. There are clearly two concurrent powers, one power in Sub-clause 2 of Clause 4, and a similar power in Clause 11, only vested in different people. That is clear? (Sir Frederick Liddell.) Undoubtedly there are concurrent powers there.

Sir Henry Slesser.] My question was whether we could fix the matter.

Lord Warrington.

56. What would happen if the Minister fixed one number and the County Council fixed another?-Whichever is the latest will prevail, I suppose.

Sir Henry Slesser.] If we are dealing with it later I thought we might give this consideration in order that the thing might be cleared up. It seems a pity now to introduce a new measure with this difficulty not touched upon.

Mr. Hudson.

57. But we are consolidating and not amending, of course? (Mr. Comyns.) It is a little different because the authority

[Continued

for altering parishes is the County Council. They have to make orders altering parishes under the Local Government Act, 1888. The general authority for altering a Poor Law Union is with the Minister. Thus, the necessity for altering may arise from the growth of population or an alteration of a parish made by the County Council by order, or by an alteration of a union made by the Minister. There the Minister would want his powers I think to meet the case of his altering a union.

Sir Henry Slesser.] I am not suggesting any alteration of anybody's powers; I am only on the wording and whether the matter should not be considered. I am not suggesting that anybody should be deprived of any powers. It is not very clear.

Chairman.

58. Under Clause 4 as drafted, the power of the Minister is taken away, is it not?-His power is to fix and to alter. "Fix" is in the first part of the sub-clause and "alter" is in the last few words. (Sir Frederick Liddell.) And the County Council is given the same powers.

Mr. Neville.

59. If the new Act does come in the County Council would have them alone? -No.

60. You are still going to preserve them for the Minister?-Yes, they are there as concurrent powers.

61. Then all you want to do is to put in "Subject to the concurrent power as hereby given."

Sir Henry Slesser.] I am not competent, I know, to suggest any change. I am only suggesting that this possible improvement in the relation between these two might be considered.

Chairman.] Shall we postpone Clause 4? In consequence of some observations of a member of the Committee it appears that we shall be free to clear this up when we get to Clause 11; so shall we postpone this clause for the present?

(Clause 4 is postponed.)

On CLAUSE 5. Chairman.

62. Now we come to Clause 5?-There is nothing in Clause 5.

(Clause 5 is passed.)

1° Decembris, 1926.]

[Continued.

the general rate levied within a Poor Law union as is applicable to the relief of the poor,' was with a view to get rid of the suggestion that a man who has had a payment out of the general rate in such cases, for example, as a man whose business is damaged, should be disqualified? -That is the second point. The first point is this. Section 14 of the Act of 1842 says that no paid officer engaged in the administration of the laws for the relief of the poor is to be capable of serving as a guardian.

Sir Henry Slesser.] I think one gets some guidance on this from the rest of the sub-section. May I just read a few words from Section 20, Sub-section 2, of the Local Government Act, 1894? "A person shall not be qualified to be elected or to be a guardian for a Poor Law union unless he is a parochial elector of some parish within the union," and so on, and then it deals with whether he is living in a county borough, and so on; and then: "No person shall be disqualified by sex or marriage for being elected or being a guardian," and then follow the words here: So much of any enactment whether in a public general or local and personal Act, as relates to the qualification of a guardian shall be repealed." So that you have got the qualification of living in a certain area, and then the disqualification of sex or marriage removed. It draws a contradistinction in that very section between qualification and disqualification.

Mr. Hudson.] It does not remove any disqualification, does it?

Sir Henry Slesser.] I think the section deals separately with qualification and disqualification.

Lord Askwith.] Could we pass the Clause and draw attention to it as being a moot point; it seems to me very doubtful.

Mr. Hudson.] But we cannot just leave it; we must decide in our minds on the wording, must we not? We cannot leave it to the two Houses to suggest an alternative drafting if we are not satisfied with the existing draft.

Lord Askwith.] I do not think you can have it judicially decided unless you have a Special Case before the Court.

Mr. Neville.

70. You think, Sir Frederick, that the better opinion is that it is still alive?I think it is still alive.

71. It is a moot point but the better opinion is that it is still alive?-Yes. Chairman.] If that is the better opinion, had we not better adopt it?

Mr. Neville.] I think so. We might state that there is a difficulty or doubt, but we believe the better opinion is that it is still alive.

Chairman.

72. You will have to alter the clause, will you not?-No; the alteration would be to strike out Clause 8 altogether. If Section 14 is dead, Clause 8 will have to go out altogether.

Sir Henry Slesser.] Perhaps I am impetuous, but it seems to me quite clear that this Section 20 of the Local Government Act, 1894, is not capable of removing disqualifications. This is dealing with qualifications and not disqualifications.

Chairman.

73. I think it is clear?-I think we have got as near as we can.

(Clause 8 is passed.)

ON CLAUSE 9. Chairman.

74. There is a little point on Clause 9 that I think you have not mentioned. In sub-clause (3) are the words: "in accordance with rules framed by the Secretary of State." Why is it not the Ministry of Health? Because registration matters have gone over to the Home Secretary. When the Ministry of Health was constituted, all the powers of the Local Government Board were transferred to the Minister, but there was power to transfer any non-health powers to any other Department, and the registration powers were all transferred to the Home Office, and the Home Office is now the Department concerned with registration.

are several Secretaries?-Every one 1S 66 the Secretary of State. There is only one Office; "a" is more correct. (Mr. Comyns.)-Something would depend on the Order in Council. Strictly, one should refer to the Order in Council to see what is said there, if possible.

Chairman.] We have not got that here. Mr. Hudson.] Perhaps a note might be made.

Chairman.

77. It arises two or three times in the course of the Bill. There is one very important place about the Report, where it says that a report is to be made to the Secretary of State?-(Sir Frederick Liddell.) Of course, that meant the Home Secretary.

78. And I think you point out in your note that one Minister cannot report for another?-That enactment related to Poor Law Commissioners, who were simply a Commission, and not a Department of State with a Minister at its head; as the Electricity Commissioners report to the Minister of Transport now.

Mr. Hudson.] Shall we leave that in suspense till we decide on the other later on?

Sir Henry Slesser.

66

79. I see that quite recently, in the Inebriates Act, 1898, the phrase used there is "the" Secretary of State. That appears to be the word of art used now, not a"?-I think I could give half-a-dozen Acts which speak of "a" Secretary of State, and half-a-dozen which speak of "the " Secretary of State, in the same year. Theoretically, every Secretary of State can do the work of all. There is only one Office, the Secretary of State. The King call appoint as many persons as he likes can do the work and divide their functions among them.

Sir Henry Slesser.] In nearly all recent Acts the word used is "the"; in the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1906, Section 10, it is "the." I have been looking through a number of recent Acts, and I find the phrase almost invariably used recently is "the" Secretary of State, and I do not see why we should go back to "a" Secretary of State.

Chairman.

80. It ought to say, the Secretary of State for Home Affairs, ought it not?—

[Continued.

No, that is absolutely wrong; it is constitutionally wrong.

Lord Warrington.] There is only one Secretary of State, really.

Mr. Hudson.] I formally move that we alter "the" to "a."

Sir Henry Slesser.] I should like to oppose that, because I think it is contrary to the present practice. As in

all these recent Acts the word used is "the," I do not see why we should not adhere to the usual form of drafting. I have looked through five Acts now, and I find the word "the" used in every case. There may be some with "a," but I see no reason why we should depart from the normal form of drafting

Lord Askwith.

We are dealing with Poor Law, and the Secretary of State for the Home Department is the man who has to deal with it; but if he were away, it would have to go to some other Department.

Colonel Windsor-Clive.

I should like to second the amendment "a" instead of "the."

(Question put: That the word "the" stand part of the Bill. The Ayes have it).

Chairman.] Perhaps we may have to make a note of that.

(Clause 9 is passed.)

ON CLAUSE 10. Chairman.

81. Then we come to Clause 10?Only "net annual value" has been substituted for "rateable value." It is & new expression. It is at line 19.

Lord Warrington.] It comes several times; it comes in line 7.

Chairman.] Yes, it comes in various parts of the Bill.

Mr. Hudson.

82. Have we got a concurrent jurisdiction here again between the Minister and the County Council?-(Mr. Comyns.) Yes.

Sir Henry Slesser.] This is the same point, I think, as we had on Clause 4. The Minister may divide a parish into wards, and then in Clause 11 a county council may divide a parish into wards.