– in the House of Commons am 12:00 am ar 15 Rhagfyr 1964.
Mr Willie Hamilton
, Fife West
I beg to move,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to repeal section 330 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1947.
I am asking the House to allow me to introduce a simple little one-Clause Bill to delete Section 330 of the 1947 Act. It might be for the convenience of the House if I explained that that was a consolidation Measure running into 275 pages—the result of agreement by a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament. The Conservative Members on that Committee apparently objected to the abolition of what is now contained in Section 330.
My hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, East (Mr. Willis)—now the Minister of State for Scotland—attempted to delete that Section in a similar procedure on 6th March, 1963. Hon. Members then present will recall the eloquent, persuasive and powerful speech he then made, unfortunately to no avail—the hordes of backwoodsmen who then sat on this side of the Chamber were much too strong for him to breach the principle. But times have changed and my hopes are correspondingly higher than were my hon. Friend's 18 months ago.
That Section of the 1947 Act allows certain unelected persons to sit on the councils of Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh, Perth and Glasgow, but not on other burgh councils. In Aberdeen, Perth and Dundee it is someone called "the Dean of Guild" who enjoys the privilege. In Edinburgh and Glasgow, there are two such individuals, the Dean of Guild and the Deacon Convenor of Trades. I am sorry that this is foreign language to my English hon. Friends. This is nothing more than a hang-over, a legacy from the murky history of the control of our cities by the vested interests of the day, the ancient equivalents of the present Tory Party.
Prior to the 1833 Municipal Corporations Act the towns were run first by the guildery and later by the guildery and the incorporated trades. The guildery apparently represented the traders and the sellers and the incorporated trades repre- sented the craftsmen of the day. They were not craftsmen as we understand them today. I should call them grafts-men, crafty men who did no work. They saw to it that others did the work. Again, they were the ancient version of the modern Tory Party.
Lord Cockburn, in his memoirs of the day, used vivid languge to describe their nefarious activities. He thundered about their corruption, their irresponsibility, their iniquity, their impenetrability—all expressions used by my hon. Friend in March, 1963. The degenerate rule of these unsavoury characters brought the cities, especially Edinburgh, to the verge of bankruptcy. Not until this century has Edinburgh rid itself of the debts left by those scoundrels. Yet, when the 1823 Act was passed introducing the first elements of democratic control into our municipalities, this poisonous undemocratic appendage was allowed to continue, albeit in a modified form, and so it has existed for 130 years.
Today the incorporated trades are closed corporations. Entrance fees are quite substantial. I remember well the former Member for Edinburgh, Central, Mr. Andrew Gilzean, speaking on the Committee stage of the Bill, in 1947, pointing out that the entrance fee for the cordwainers was about £1,600. Mr. Carmichael, the former Member for Glasgow, Bridgeton, mentioned the corporations of the bonnet makers and dyers. To get into these one did not have to know how to make a bonnet or to dye cloth; anyone could join if he could pay the fees. These bodies represent no one but themselves. Yet they have the right to select from among their members persons to sit on our city councils, with all the rights of councillors elected by democratic processes.
As long ago as 1835 a Royal Commission on "The Existing State of the Municipal Corporations in Scotland" said, and I quote direct from its Report:
In the recent Act of Parliament relative to the election of burgh councils, a certain anomaly has been adopted in reference to a few burghs, the expediency of which we feel ourselves compelled to question.
In each of the burghs of Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dundee and Perth, the Dean of Guild, elected by the guild brethen and, in each of the two former burghs, the Deacon Convenor elected by the convenery, is, by that Act, declared to be, in virtue of these elections, a constituent member of council.
The Report goes on:
We have been unable to discover any reason why these particular corporations should be endowed with that extraordinary privilege … We recommend …that the seats ex-officio should be taken away, and that these councillors should be replaced by election.
One-hundred-and-thirty years have gone by since then, yet we claim to be in process of modernising Britain. My considered opinion is that 130 years, even for this country, is just about long enough to delay the implementation of a Royal Commission's recommendation. The timing of my proposed Bill is particularly apposite. Rightly or wrongly—I think rightly—party politics have been increasingly intensified in our local government affairs. In cities like Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen and Perth, party political fortunes ebb and flow. Fairly recent evidence, which, again, was quoted by my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, East last March, showed how these unelected individuals can be wed by the Conservatives for blatant party motives. It may not be British but it makes sense to them.
In Edinburgh today, in particular, the political balance could hardly be finer. In such circumstances as these it is indefensible that the future government of that great city should depend on the political views of two unelected, non-representative members of the council. When my hon. Friend was seeking to introduce his Bill in March, 1963, the hon. Member for Glasgow, Hillhead (Mr. Galbraith)—I do not see him in his place—opposed the Bill on several grounds.
First, the hon. Member said that it was not opportune. It never is in circumstances such as these. He argued that it was not the only undemocratic element in our society, and quoted the House of Lords. I am prepared to bring in another Ten Minutes Rule Bill to deal with that if that is the argument now. He also said that this was only a small problem, as there were only two councillors out of 113 concerned in Glasgow. On the same basis, how would we feel in this House if there were 12 unelected Members here at this particular time?
My Bill will, I hope, be acceptable to every Member. We are all declared democrats in this House. There can be no defence for the further continuation of the existence of these unelected members in our great cities in Scotland.
As a bill passes through Parliament, MPs and peers may suggest amendments - or changes - which they believe will improve the quality of the legislation.
Many hundreds of amendments are proposed by members to major bills as they pass through committee stage, report stage and third reading in both Houses of Parliament.
In the end only a handful of amendments will be incorporated into any bill.
The Speaker - or the chairman in the case of standing committees - has the power to select which amendments should be debated.
The house of Lords is the upper chamber of the Houses of Parliament. It is filled with Lords (I.E. Lords, Dukes, Baron/esses, Earls, Marquis/esses, Viscounts, Count/esses, etc.) The Lords consider proposals from the EU or from the commons. They can then reject a bill, accept it, or make amendments. If a bill is rejected, the commons can send it back to the lords for re-discussion. The Lords cannot stop a bill for longer than one parliamentary session. If a bill is accepted, it is forwarded to the Queen, who will then sign it and make it law. If a bill is amended, the amended bill is sent back to the House of Commons for discussion.
The Lords are not elected; they are appointed. Lords can take a "whip", that is to say, they can choose a party to represent. Currently, most Peers are Conservative.
Of a male MP, sitting on his regular seat in the House. For females, "in her place".
The political party system in the English-speaking world evolved in the 17th century, during the fight over the ascension of James the Second to the Throne. James was a Catholic and a Stuart. Those who argued for Parliamentary supremacy were called Whigs, after a Scottish word whiggamore, meaning "horse-driver," applied to Protestant rebels. It was meant as an insult.
They were opposed by Tories, from the Irish word toraidhe (literally, "pursuer," but commonly applied to highwaymen and cow thieves). It was used — obviously derisively — to refer to those who supported the Crown.
By the mid 1700s, the words Tory and Whig were commonly used to describe two political groupings. Tories supported the Church of England, the Crown, and the country gentry, while Whigs supported the rights of religious dissent and the rising industrial bourgeoisie. In the 19th century, Whigs became Liberals; Tories became Conservatives.
Ministers make up the Government and almost all are members of the House of Lords or the House of Commons. There are three main types of Minister. Departmental Ministers are in charge of Government Departments. The Government is divided into different Departments which have responsibilities for different areas. For example the Treasury is in charge of Government spending. Departmental Ministers in the Cabinet are generally called 'Secretary of State' but some have special titles such as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Ministers of State and Junior Ministers assist the ministers in charge of the department. They normally have responsibility for a particular area within the department and are sometimes given a title that reflects this - for example Minister of Transport.
The Conservatives are a centre-right political party in the UK, founded in the 1830s. They are also known as the Tory party.
With a lower-case ‘c’, ‘conservative’ is an adjective which implies a dislike of change, and a preference for traditional values.
A parliamentary bill is divided into sections called clauses.
Printed in the margin next to each clause is a brief explanatory `side-note' giving details of what the effect of the clause will be.
During the committee stage of a bill, MPs examine these clauses in detail and may introduce new clauses of their own or table amendments to the existing clauses.
When a bill becomes an Act of Parliament, clauses become known as sections.
