My Lords, I thank my noble friend Lord Graham for all the work he has done on behalf of freemen. I correct him in that I am an honorary freeman of England and Wales. In fact, I was proposed by the freemen of York, not by the freemen of Newcastle-under-Lyme, who are called burgesses, not freemen, which complicates things even further.
The clerk to the trustees of the burgesses of Newcastle-under-Lyme wrote to me and I have passed the letter to my noble friend Lord Graham. I received a further letter from them, explaining where they have difficulty with the Bill, although they have no difficulty with the principle of the Bill or with the enabling Bill of my noble friend Lord Graham. The clerk to the trustees wrote that he had, ""difficulty with the wording of what is proposed. In Newcastle-under-Lyme the status of freedom is conferred on birth. On coming of age, a young man presents himself to the Mayor of the ""Borough for confirmation of that status. As such, he does not ‘claim to be admitted’ in that the Mayor does not ‘admit’ a man to Freedom but simply acknowledges that he has held status which he has claims from birth. Accordingly, if the Bill is enacted in its present form, I should be left with a very difficult problem of construction. Sub-clause (2)(1)(A) clearly addresses the case where a man claims ‘to be admitted as a Freeman’ i.e. it speaks to a future state of affairs which lies in the gift of a third party. Those words are not, as I say, apt to cover the situation in Newcastle-under-Lyme and on balance I would feel compelled to advise the Trustees that the amendment now proposed if, enacted, would have no application within this borough"."
That adds a further complication to what my noble friend Lord Graham has said. It is obvious that rules for many of these guilds of freemen vary from area to area. This matter has to be tackled constructively through discussion with the freemen, who know their own rules, and it has to be agreed. The freemen are not in principle against women being adopted as freemen but they believe that the clause is so flawed that it will not apply to some of them but may apply to others. Therefore, I ask that these fresh clauses be reconsidered, we have a general discussion on them and that, if necessary, we include the measure proposed by my noble friend Lord Graham. I believe that his proposal, which allowed each guild of freemen to deal with the matter as they saw fit, would be the best way to proceed.
Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Golding
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 9 November 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
714 c657-8 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:43:39 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_593592
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_593592
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_593592