View report page

27
12. Your Petitioners desire to point out that, as set out in the foregoing
paragraph No. 10, the Parish of Putney, if treated as a separate parish,
would be called upon to contribute, upon the basis of last year's figures, the
sum of £626 to the Equalisation Fund, but as such parish forms part of
your Petitioners' district it would receive from the said Fund the sum
of £428.
13. As set out in the foregoing paragraph No. 11, the Parishes of Putney
and Streatham, if treated as separate parishes, would be called upon to contribute,
upon the basis of this year's figures, the sums of £657 and £131
respectively to the Equalisation Fund, but as such parishes form part of
your Petitioners' district they would receive from the said Fund the sums
of £389 and £941 respectively.
14. The difference in the effect of the Bill upon your Petitioners' district
in two successive years, shown by the foregoing paragraphs Nos. 10 and 11,
is caused by the increase in the rateable value of your Petitioners' district.
This increase of rateable value arises from an increase of the population of
the district, but as by Clause 3 of the Bill the population is defined as that
of the last published census the population is taken to be stationary for the
ten years between each census. Your Petitioners' district and other districts
where the opening up of new estates for building purposes is rapidly proceeding
are by the operation of this principle placed at a great disadvantage
as compared with the more central parts of London, where the population
is diminishing. Your Petitioners submit that if the alteration in the
rateable value is taken into account in determining the contributions to
the Equalisation Fund the estimated alteration in the population should
also be taken into acccount in apportioning the grants from such Fund,
15. Your Petitioners submit further that even if the basis of population
is to remain that of the latest census, the grant to your Petitioners from the
Equalisation Fund for the two periods referred to in the foregoing
paragraphs Nos. 10 and 11 should be £4,407 and £4,227 respectively,
instead of £3,781 and £3,439 respectively, and that the two former sums
should be apportioned amongst the several parishes as shown in columns
numbered 4 and 10 respectively.
Your Petitioners therefore humbly pray that Clauses 1 and 3 of the Bill
may be amended so as to provide that in determining the grants
due from the Equalisation Fund the alterations in the population
as well as the alterations in the rateable value since the preceding
determination shall be taken into account; and that each parish,
whether forming part of the district of a Board of Works or not,
shall be dealt with as a separate parish in determining both the
contributions to and the grants from the said Fund.
The Bill has not yet (June 25th) reached the second
reading.
General Powers The Board objected to the provisions
Bill in the London County Council (General
Powers) Bill by which it was proposed to make a Vestry