| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury): Does the hon. Gentleman agree that one way to increase the perceived importance of town councils would be to give them a greater say in the planning process? Like me, the hon. Gentleman comes from Gloucestershire, so he will be aware that people's views, expressed through the town councils, are being overridden by unelected inspectors.
Mr. Drew: I shall not take up that challenge, but the hon. Gentleman knows my views on planning, as do many other hon. Members. I concur that there would probably be great benefit if local opinion, which is reflected in parish and town councils, were listened to more carefully, not just as part of the appeal process, but in advance of that process. Certainly when appeals are heard, it would nice for local councils to be given a proper role in the process.
I should like some answers from my hon. Friend about some specific issues, some of which are more important than others. My starting point is what I consider to be the Government's interest and concern for uprating and improving local government structure and the new ethical framework. Local councils support the Government's desire to provide an ethical framework for local government, based on codes of conduct, standards committees and so on. However, there is a belief that the concept is being passed down to them, rather than being created in the context of how local councils can best perform. That does not fully recognise the position of local councils in their own right. The alternative suggestion from the NALC is that local councils in each county area should prepare their own code of conduct in the light of national advice. The Government should be urged to rethink and clarify how that could be taken forward.
The second issue is best value. Again, local councils strongly support the approach of the Government in that regard. The policy intention is that the new regime will apply to all local authorities, including local councils, with budgeted expenditure above a defined threshold. The Government have indicated that that may be set at £500,000, subject to further consultation. Many local councils would allege that that is a low level, and it would be sensible for the Government to consider raising it. It is understood that the Government will consult with the NALC about the issue, and I look forward to hearing the result.
The third issue is community leadership, and again it is proposed that there be a new duty on all manner of local authorities to promote the social and economic well-being of communities. That will apply to the lowest level of local government. It would be sensible to recognise that that can be achieved by those councils in the lowest category, and again we would hope that the remit of such councils would be properly constituted and understood. I believe that it should be the right of every area, if it so wishes, to have a local council--whether that be a parish, a town or a community council.
It is pleasing that although every part of my area is now parished, other parts of Gloucestershire, which were traditionally not completely parished--such as the Cotswolds and the Forest of Dean--are now creating parish councils, which seem to be popular. I hope that the Government will welcome and encourage that, and not see it as a threat to other levels of local democracy.
My fourth point concerns the European charter of local self-government. There was concern, surprise and disappointment among councils that they were not included when the Government decided to ratify the charter. Councils, along with the principal authorities, had looked forward to the signing of the charter by the new Government and to its eventual ratification. They were taken aback when it was not applied to them, and the Government ought to think about the benefits of so doing.
I would link that with the local councils' welcome for the regionalisation of this country. They feel that they can play a part in helping that process. They would not want to have a formal role within regional development agencies, but some disappointment has been expressed at the fact that they have not always been included in the proposals or action plans for the evolution of the relevant chambers. That is not true in all areas and, in the south-west, there is a representation of local councillors through to the regional chamber. However, that is not always the case.
There are some real concerns about funding, as well as about the auditing and accounting regimes--certainly about the way in which local councils can borrow, which has been referred to as loan sanctioning. The restriction in total to £6.7 million a year is seen to be unduly restrictive. My largest town council, Stroud, has been seeking to borrow money, quite justifiably, for a particular project, but it is like waiting for Buggins's turn to get the money. That is neither fair nor reasonable, and I hope that the Minister will comment on whether it will be possible to increase the total amount and consider whether that could be shared out fairly.
The concern among parish and town councils about auditing and accounting is the principal reason for this Adjournment debate. They are concerned, first, about the imposition by regulation of a £5,000 a year spending threshold, above which all local council accounts are subjected to the full audit regime. Secondly, many councils are unhappy with the audit system itself because they consider it to be excessively prolonged, thus increasing fees. Complaints have also been raised at times about a lack of professionalism. Councils do not have the time to do what they want to do to meet the requirements of the Audit Commission.
It being Seven o'clock, the motion for the Adjournment of the House lapsed, without Question put.
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.--[Mr. McAvoy.]
Mr. Drew:
I undertook a survey and found that many councils were concerned about how the audit system was being applied. Many said that they wanted changes. By pure chance, I was sent some information a couple of days ago by Cotswold district council showing that Adlestrop had a precept of £181 a year and an audit fee of £168; one may well ask what happened to the other £13, but it is a question of precepting for a purpose.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. Nick Raynsford):
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud (Mr. Drew) on his success in the ballot, and on raising the subject of the role of parish and town councils. It was apparent from what he said that he has great experience of the operation of local councils, especially in Gloucestershire. The role of town and parish councils is a matter of real concern at a time when everyone in local government is rightly considering the way in which their institutions operate and the role that local authorities, including parish councils, play in the democratic structure.
The enactment of the Local Government and Rating Act 1997, with full support from the current Government, reflects the valid role that parishes have to play. The implementation of that Act--the first parish-focused legislation in over 25 years, which the previous Government took through Parliament with our support--has enabled communities for the first time to petition for a parish in an unparished area and has returned the power to district councils to undertake reviews of their parish arrangements.
We have already agreed a number of new parishes and 20 will have been constituted by 1 April. I think that that provides a response to what my hon. Friend said and proves that we see a role for parishes in the democratic structure and that we are already encouraging the creation of more local councils.
When we were elected in May 1997 we pledged to modernise the country and bring government back to the people; and to create a new Britain for the new millennium--a decent society that serves all its people and not only the few. We are now implementing the most radical improvement to our constitution this century, with devolution for Scotland and Wales; a London Assembly with an elected mayor; and development agencies for the English regions.
Our better government initiative, along with the comprehensive spending review and our work on freedom of information, has examined how government can function more effectively and openly; but if we are to achieve change and deliver our pledges we need to mobilise all levels of government and society to work together. Local government at every level has a key role to play if people are to have the quality of life that they deserve. That must and should include parishes.
Local government is essential to our democracy but it is not as strong as it ought to be. One does not have to look far to see the weaknesses: low turnout at local elections--only 26 per cent. last May--and 2 million absentees from the electoral register. Too few people find local government interesting enough to bother to register or vote. We want to encourage the public to become more involved in local democracy and we hope that parishes will use their role as representatives of their communities to encourage local people to take part and have their say.
The White Paper "Modern Local Government: In Touch with the People" put in place an ambitious programme of reform for the next 10 years or more. To implement that programme requires action by central Government and local government, local communities, business and the voluntary sector. I hope that parish councils will play their part. They have an important role to play in local decision making and provide a valuable opportunity for local people to take part in managing their environment. That is especially true in rural areas where parish councils are vital in representing, and servicing at the most local level, small and often tightly knit communities.
My hon. Friend the Member for Stroud referred to the rural White Paper. Thriving rural communities are an integral part of the Government's vision of a fair and decent society. Rural England is changing and we must respond to that change. We have therefore announced plans to produce the rural White Paper this year. It will look at the long-term future for the English countryside and at how a wide range of policies can support rural communities in the future. Work will proceed in tandem with the urban White Paper, recognising that town and country are inextricably linked. Consultation will be an important part of the process, so we will shortly issue a discussion document setting out key themes and inviting comments in advance of the publication of the White Papers. The National Association of Local Councils will of course be one of the consultees and is to help us in ensuring the consultation paper is seen by parish councils. I can assure my hon. Friend that any comments made by parishes will be carefully considered.
As my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud made clear, there are wide variations between individual local councils, not least in size. While town and parish councils, and their representatives, play a vital representative role both locally and nationally, most parish councils have a limited role in terms of expenditure, functions and staff resources when compared with principal councils. Therefore, few of the changes we are considering for local authorities as a result of our local government White Paper will affect parish councils directly. Indeed, in many ways, because of their very local nature they are already close to their communities and, of course, as was mentioned, parish councils are unique in that every local government elector for such councils has the right to raise any matter affecting parish business at the annual parish meeting. In that respect, I agree that democracy is already more direct than in the case of other tiers of local government.
Minsters meet the National Association of Local Councils regularly. My hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and Housing spoke at the NALC conference last year and met with NALC representatives most recently only last month where all the issues raised today were discussed in some detail. I shall therefore cover them only briefly now.
I note the comments by my hon. Friend the Member for Stroud on the new ethical framework, but the important thing to note is that local codes of conduct will be drawn up in consultation with local councils. As for best value, we are consulting various local government associations, including NALC, to consider the extent to which local councils should be subject to the best value regime. I am pleased to hear my hon. Friend's comments on the wish of local councils to play a positive role in the development of best value.
As I have already said, ministerial agreement to a number of new parishes confirms our view that they have a role in community leadership where a parish is wanted by local people. As for the cost of elections, it is a matter for local discretion as to whether a district council chooses to reclaim the cost of a parish by-election from the parish council. I understand that the Home Office has no plans at present to reconsider the existing legislation.
I do not intend to stray into the planning process, despite the temptation provided by the hon. Member for Tewkesbury (Mr. Robertson), but I note that the Rural Development Commission has provided assistance to parish councils through the production of a software package on village appraisals to aid them and others to understand their local community. That will help them to respond to the real challenges that arise from new planning proposals that affect their communities.
I am sorry that the reasons why parish councils are not subject to the European charter of local self-government are not fully understood. Rather than rehearse those arguments, I shall write to my hon. Friend to set out more fully the reasons why the Government reached that decision. As for regional chambers, we believe that it is right that it should be for the chamber itself to decide whether parish councils should be members.
As my hon. Friend is probably also aware, we are investigating the position on loan sanctions as the last two financial years have ended with a considerable balance of unused allocation. We need to be clear for future years about whether there is unmet demand. To that end it has been agreed that all borrowing approval applications will be submitted to my officials until the end of the financial year.
The new audit arrangements have been in place for only two years. They must be given time to settle down. We recognise that some parish clerks will have had difficulties adjusting to the new requirements, but audits should become clearer and simpler as parish clerks become more familiar with the new regulations. No doubt the Audit Commission will welcome NALC's views on the system in practice.
It has been said that the introduction of council tax benefit subsidy limitation would be a potential indirect cap on local council spending. That is not the case.
Although local precepting authorities are outside the scheme, in that they will not make contributions to benefit costs where the local authority sets a council tax above guideline, changes in the local precept may affect the amount by which it exceeds the guideline and, thus, the contribution to costs. The Government believe it right that that cost is met, in part or in full, by the local taxpayer rather than nationally. We expect local precepting authorities to behave responsibly and to take that into account.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |