| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Local Government Bill
Lords amendments considered.
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Michael J. Martin):
I must draw the attention of the House to the fact that privilege is involved in Lords amendments Nos. 14 and 20, which are to be considered today. If the House agrees to either of the amendments, I shall ensure that the appropriate entry is made in the Journal.
Lords amendment: No. 1, in page 3, line 36, leave out ("such persons as he thinks fit.") and insert--
("(a) persons appearing to him to represent the best value authorities concerned, and
(b) such other persons (if any) as he thinks fit.")
6.6 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions (Mr. Alan Meale): I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
The amendment further refines subsection 4(3) by placing a requirement on the Secretary of State, or the National Assembly for Wales, to consult persons who appear to them to represent best value authorities, and other persons, if any, as they consider appropriate, before specifying performance indicators or standards under the clause.
The Government have made it clear, both in the local government White Papers published a year ago and regularly during the passage of this Bill through both Houses, that we intend to consult widely on performance indicators and standards before they are specified under the clause. Hon. Members will be pleased to see that commitment set out in the Bill. I hope that they will also be pleased to hear that we intend to consult on our draft suite of best value performance indicators and standards shortly.
Mr. Nigel Waterson (Eastbourne):
The Minister rightly said that the amendment is about consultation. It was a constant theme in the Bill's earlier stages both here and in another place that, given that the Government are taking draconian powers, there should be as wide a consultation as possible. The clause originally referred to the Secretary of State consulting anyone whom he saw fit to consult, so we welcome the amendment.
I agree with what the Minister said about the provenance of the amendment. It arose from a debate in the other place. It would insert into the Bill a requirement to consult with representatives of best value authorities when consulting on performance indicators and standards. That matter worried the Local Government Association and other bodies representing local government. The amendment reflects the views on all sides of the House of Lords.
Sir Paul Beresford (Mole Valley):
All hon. Members will agree with what my hon. Friend is saying, but amendment No. 6, to which we will come later, would speed up the introduction of the provisions on best value.
Mr. Waterson:
My hon. Friend makes a very practical point, which we shall debate in connection with amendment No. 6. I hope that the Minister responding to that debate will take my hon. Friend's remarks into account.
The amendment reflects the cross-party views of the House of Lords. We have always argued that, if the Government were to insist on taking such draconian powers, the consultation involved should be as wide as possible. The amendment also reflects the concerns of local government organisations, and those raised by Baroness Miller in the House of Lords. I welcome it.
Mr. Adrian Sanders (Torbay):
I wish only to emphasise that the amendment enjoyed cross-party agreement in the other place, where it was accepted that consultation was vital and should be as wide as possible. I hope that the Minister will spell out the limits of the consultation and assure the House that sufficient time will be available for it.
Mr. Meale:
I assure the House that all appropriate authorities and associations will be consulted. Moreover, I can tell the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Mr. Waterson) that there will be no delay. The Government believe that we can get the Bill on the road in time.
Lords amendment agreed to.
Lords amendment: No. 2, after clause 13, to insert the following new clause--Inspections: housing benefit and council tax benefit--
The Minister for Local Government and Housing (Ms Armstrong):
I beg to move, That this House agrees with the Lords in the said amendment.
Mr. Deputy Speaker:
With this, it will be convenient to take Lords amendment No. 8.
Ms Armstrong:
Throughout the passage of this Bill in both Houses of Parliament the Government have stated that they are committed to ensuring that the legislative framework for best value should be as transparent as possible. The new clause in amendment No. 2 is therefore designed to put the benefit fraud inspectorate's powers on as clear a statutory footing as possible.
The benefit fraud inspectorate's work on the administration of housing benefit and council tax benefit is very much in keeping with the ethos of best value, but the existing powers are framed in very specific, rather than general, terms. We want to make absolutely sure that the inspectorate can contribute its expertise to the best value scrutiny of this very important area of local authority work. This is, therefore, a technical amendment, designed to provide clarity about the extent of the BFI's powers to inspect authorities for the purposes of best value.
Mr. Waterson:
I shall not detain the House. The Minister rightly said that amendment No. 8 is purely technical. Amendment No. 2 is somewhat more substantial, and would have the effect of clarifying that pursuit of benefit fraud is part of the best value process. Lord Whitty made that point in the debate in the House of Lords, stating that
Mr. Sanders:
I am worried about the problems encountered by the housing benefit authorities in the verification process. Increasing regulation and checks on claimants have caused significant delays for claimants and landlords. Although the amendment would permit investigation into whether the relevant administration is administering housing benefit correctly, the process of that investigation could impact on claimants and landlords alike. I hope that the Minister will clarify that.
".--(1) The following shall be substituted for section 139A(1) and (2) of the Social Security Administration Act 1992 (reports on administration of housing benefit and council tax benefit)--
"(1) The Secretary of State may authorise persons to consider and report to him on the administration by authorities of housing benefit and council tax benefit.
(2) The Secretary of State may ask persons authorised under subsection (1) to consider in particular--
(a) authorities' performance in the prevention and detection of fraud relating to housing benefit and council tax benefit;
(b) authorities' compliance with the requirements of Part I of the Local Government Act 1999 (best value).
(2A) A person may be authorised under subsection (1)--
(a) on such terms and for such period as the Secretary of State thinks fit;
(b) to act generally or in relation to a specified authority or authorities;
(c) to report on administration generally or on specified matters."
(2) In section 139C(1) of that Act (reports) for the words from "in particular" to the end there shall be substituted "in particular--
(a) in the prevention and detection of fraud relating to benefit, or
(b) for the purposes of complying with the requirements of Part I of the Local Government Act 1999 (best value).""
"we wish to make absolutely sure that this very important area of local authority work is subject to the same best value scrutiny as will exist elsewhere."--[Official Report, House of Lords, 17 June 1999; Vol. 602, c. 514.]
Although Conservative Members might have reservations about the implementation of best value and about its centralised and prescriptive approach, all hon. Members agree that it is important to bear down on
benefit fraud, wherever and however it occurs. It is clearly right that pursuit of fraud should be placed firmly in the best value regime. We support the amendment.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |