Examination of Witnesses (Questions 116
- 119)
THURSDAY 9 SEPTEMBER 2004
COUNCILLOR SIR
SANDY BRUCE
LOCKHARDT AND
COUNCILLOR SIR
JEREMY BEECHAM
Q116 Chairman: I would like to make
a couple of points before we start the evidence session on the
Draft Regional Assemblies Bill. Quite a few organisations and
groups of people have been lobbying the Committee office wanting
to give evidence to the Committee. Could I first of all point
out that there is a principle at stake. When people put in written
evidence, we look at that and then make an assessment of who may
well be representative, who may well have points that the Committee
needs to consider. Our first concern is that we try to make sure
we look at the written evidence first, and on the basis of that
written evidence we consider whether we call people for oral evidence.
The second point I want to make is that I strongly deprecate organisations
attempting to bully the Committee office into wanting either more
time or to come before the Committee. I do not think that is fair.
If they want to bully anyone, they can try bullying me, but I
can assure you it will not be successful. May I welcome you as
the fist two witnesses and ask you to identify yourselves for
the record.
Sir Sandy Bruce Lockhardt: Sandy
Bruce Lockhardt, Chairman of the Local Government Association.
Sir Jeremy Beecham: Jeremy Beecham,
Vice-Chairman of the Local Government Association.
Q117 Chairman: Do you want to say
anything by way of introduction, or are you happy for us to go
straight to questions?
Sir Sandy Bruce Lockhardt: I will
say something briefly, thank you, Chairman. The Local Government
Association is united on its principles about the regional bill,
in that it is opposed to the drawing up of any powers from local
people and powers from local authorities and in that it wants
to see any regional chambers or regional assemblies purely strategic
in their nature. My own view—and of course the Local Government
Association has differing views on the principles across the regions
and across the political parties—is that the regional agenda
is inconsistent across the United Kingdom; that the powers proposed
in this particular bill do not match those of Scotland and Wales
and it is therefore inequitable; it is probably unwanted; it is
undemocratic, in that in the South East you have one councillor
representing a quarter of a million people; and it would tend
to duplicate the role of existing local authorities. In addition,
of course, we are concerned, as indeed the Local Government Association
as a whole is, about the linking with the restructuring of local
government.
Chairman: Thank you very much.
Q118 Mr Betts: Could we begin on
the issue of the general view you have about powers not being
pulled up from local government level to regional assemblies.
Do you think that actually is the case in terms of the bill, or
do you have concerns about particular responsibilities that have
been taken from a local level and suggested as powers for the
regional assemblies?
Sir Sandy Bruce Lockhardt: If
you look at the main clause in paragraph 43 on the purposes and
powers of the assemblies, it says that they are for the promotion
of economic/social development and protection of the environment.
The Local Government Act which was recently introduced had a power
which ministers and the Deputy Prime Minister have placed great
emphasis on, in that it introduced a new power for the social,
economic and environmental well-being in the responsibility of
local authorities and their democratic accountability for that.
Those words exactly match the purposes of the regional assemblies
and therefore I think there is a duplication. The Local Government
Association would wish to see a clear statement in the bill—which
we are told in words by the minister—that the bill and the
regional chambers will not draw up powers from local people and
local authorities.
Sir Jeremy Beecham: If I may,
Mr Chairman, the problem with the bill in this respect is that
clause 45 gives power for the Government to allocate further functions
to the regional assemblies without primary legislation. Whilst
we are quite content that in delegating powers downwards there
should not be a requirement for primary legislation, we are concerned
at the upward movement of powers and responsibilities without
primary legislation. That is a different concept and one that
we do regard as needing amendment in the bill.
Q119 Sir Paul Beresford: Would you
agree that if you looked at the London Mayor and the local authority,
with their struggle to justify themselves and find something to
do and the conflict between them and the local authorities, that
your fear is, in essence, that this is just the first building
block, and gradually local authorities are going to have their
services, their powers stripped away and brought up while the
government will not move at all to put powers down?
Sir Sandy Bruce Lockhardt: I think
that is so, but there is a difference in the case of London in
that it actually has some responsibility for transport and policing.
The thing about the current proposals in the bill is that they
will not have responsibility; they will simply have influence,
because the responsibility for most of the main plans which will
go from the regional assemblies will go from the regional assemblies
to the Secretary of State. So it is not like Scotland, it is not
like Wales, it is not like London; it is a body which influences
and unfortunately interferes and duplicates the role of local
authorities.
Sir Paul Beresford: Does it influence
or—
Chairman: I am sorry. Clive Betts.
| 
