| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
7.45 pm
The way in which Government amendments have been introduced on Report clearly signals the close control that the Government intend to exercise over local authorities. This is not the partnership that was proclaimed at the election. I frankly admit that one of the criticisms that I had of the 18 years of Conservative Government was that, in our drive for fiscal and economic efficiency, on
occasions we overrode the need for effective local government. What I find so extraordinary is that, far from wanting to reverse that, which is something which I would have at least tacitly supported and applauded on a selective basis, the Government are going much further and, instead of the tried and well tested system of allowing local government autonomy and interfering only where there is need, the autonomy will completely disappear, and the powers being taken by the Government in new clause 4 are all part of that. For those reasons, I oppose the new clause.
Mr. Jon Owen Jones:
When I moved the new clause I welcomed the constructive approach adopted by the hon. Member for North Essex (Mr. Jenkin) in Committee and his determination to ensure that best value worked to good effect. However, in the past few hours, Opposition Members have made few constructive comments. Unfortunately, the Opposition's Janus-like view seems set to continue.
The hon. Member for Mole Valley (Sir P. Beresford) spoke of an army of inspectors. However, by enabling co-ordination and the co-opting of expert advice, the Government's new clause and amendments help to ensure effective and economic inspection.
The right hon. Member for Skipton and Ripon (Mr. Curry), who is no longer present, raised concerns about the number of inspections, a general theme among Opposition Members. Whether deliberately or otherwise, they seem to have misunderstood the nature of the inspection envisaged in the Bill.
In Committee, my right hon. Friend the Minister for Local Government and Housing referred on numerous occasions to the lightness of touch of inspections, saying that they would be triggered only by such things as the auditors' report or other serious causes for concern. It is not as though inspections will occur for no good reason, and will be the order of the day, occurring continuously. That is the impression that any member of the public listening would have got from Opposition Members, perhaps deliberately so.
Sir Paul Beresford:
Will the Minister give way?
Mr. Jones:
No, I shall not give way. For three hours I have been listening to the repetitious comments of Opposition Members. Very few of them were meant for serious consideration, but I want to address the serious points that were made.
The hon. Member for North Essex asked a number of questions and I shall try to answer some of them. He gave some welcome to new clause 4 and its attempt to ensure co-ordination, but he asked for an example of what the guidance would be. The inspection forums should, first and foremost, undertake the co-ordination functions for the various inspectorate regimes. Guidance issued by the Secretary of State or the Welsh Assembly would be a last-resort power used only when the forums had failed to agree. The failures in the forums would serve as indicators of what should be included in the guidance and, therefore, I cannot be specific about what the guidance will say until we see what causes disagreement.
The hon. Gentleman also asked some questions about amendment No. 19, as did other hon. Members.
Mr. Jenkin:
That pretty inadequate answer is an admission that the Government are applying for yet
Mr. Jones:
The hon. Gentleman knows that it is in his best interest to appeal to the Conservative Members sitting behind him, but he has my answer.
Amendment No. 19 deals with the Audit Commission's powers to delegate. The Audit Commission Act 1998 provides for such powers in the undertaking of the commission's present functions. The Bill extends the commission's functions and the amendment simply allows it the same power to delegate in respect of best value as it has in other areas.
The hon. Gentleman asked why amendment No. 12 specifically refers to the Welsh Assembly. It does so because that amendment relates to clause 31 which is in part III, where the substitution provided for in clause27--the Bill's Welsh clause--does not operate. Clause 27 is in part I.
The one non-Government amendment is amendment No. 95, which would restrict the flexibility of the inspector to vary his fee in respect of an inspection where significantly more work was involved than he had originally envisaged. That variation has been deliberately built in to cater for exceptional circumstances. If an inspector were to uncover acute failure, the fee could easily be greatly exceeded. The drafting of the clause reflects that of the Audit Commission Act 1998. When carrying out an audit, it is usual for the auditor and the authority to agree the approximate cost in advance, with the authority being informed during the audit whether any significant variation is likely to be necessary.
Sir Paul Beresford:
Will the Minister give way?
We expect that inspections will work in a similar way. In order to retain the flexibility to deal with situations in the most appropriate and cost-effective way, I ask Conservative Members to withdraw their amendment, although I have little confidence that their answer will be affirmative.
The hon. Member for Taunton (Jackie Ballard), who is not in the Chamber at the moment--
Mr. Jones:
I shall try to be gallant; having sat through the past three hours, I can well understand why the hon. Lady is not present. She asked whether the amendment relating to energy conservation could be included in the Bill. That amendment has not been accepted because it was not in order; if another can be drafted which is in order, we will consider it.
Question put and agreed to.
Clause read a Second time, and added to the Bill.
Brought up, and read the First time.
Mr. Jenkin:
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael Lord):
With this, it will be convenient to discuss amendment No. 83, in clause 13, page 9, line 24, after 'State', insert
Mr. Jenkin:
The new clause is all-embracing. The Under-Secretary of State for Wales, who wound up the previous debate and is leaving the Chamber, accused us of being Janus-like in our opposition to the Bill, but more Janus-like is the Labour party's attitude, which produced the Bill in the first place. The expectation, from all the body language and attitude of Labour Members when they were in opposition, was that they would give powers back to local authorities and reverse the trend of centralisation which, we have to admit, occurred under the Conservatives.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. Nick Raynsford):
They confess.
Mr. Jenkin:
Yes, we confess. There were many constraints upon us that required us to take powers to central Government, but that was never a process that we enjoyed, and I suspect that the Labour party is enjoying that process even less. If ever an expectation were dashed, this is it; the Bill takes 27 new powers for the Secretary of State over the activities, functions and finances of local government.
The whole purpose of the Bill is make improvements in respect of activities undertaken by local authorities. The Labour party promised to abolish compulsory competitive tendering, but the best value powers over the activities of local authorities are more penetrative, more all-embracing and more comprehensive than the relatively limited competitive tendering powers.
The Labour party also promised to abolish what it called crude and universal capping, a phrase that was flourished at Labour party conferences in times gone by to give the impression that Labour was against capping. Attaching the term "crude and universal" to capping, suggested that capping was crude and universal by nature, but we now know that Labour meant that it would abolish one kind of capping and replace it with another.
'(1) In the event of the Secretary of State's powers under sections 5 (2), 5 (4), 6 (2), 7 (4b), 7 (4c), 7 (4e), 7 (4f), 7 (5c), 9 (5), 10 (2), 10 (3) and 14 of this Act not being exercised in respect of a particular best value authority within any period of three years after the coming into effect of this Act, the powers in this Act shall only be exercised in respect of that authority subject to an overriding order under this section.
'(2) No such order shall be made under this section unless a draft has been laid before, and approved by resolution, of each House of Parliament.
(3) Such an overriding order shall itself expire if at any time a period of 3 years has elapsed during which none of the Secretary of State's powers specified in subsection (1) have been exercised.'.--[Mr. Jenkin.]
'subject to section (Requirement for overriding order) above'.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |