Examination of Witnesses (Questions 300
- 319)
TUESDAY 14 SEPTEMBER 2004
MR RICHARD
ALLAN, MR
IAN SCOTTER,
MR JONATHAN
BLACKIE AND
MR ANDREW
CAMPBELL
Q300 Sir Paul Beresford: As a whole.
Mr Scotter: It does have a very
wide-ranging general power to do—
Q301 Sir Paul Beresford: To do something,
whatever that is?
Mr Scotter:—promote its
purposes, which are, promoting economic development, social development
and improving and protecting the environment in the region, which
is a substantial portfolio. The job of the monitoring committee
is to work with the assembly. The small number of members is part
of it, because this is meant to be a strategic body which is looking
across the region rather than looking at detailed localities in
the region. The use of proportional representation as a means
of voting, the involvement of stakeholders is all intended to
have the assembly working more by consensus and agreement than
getting into necessarily the political tensions, because these
are important issues which need to run across the life of several
assemblies in many cases. Regional spatial planning and economic
strategies take quite along time to deliver and you need some
continuity. The role of the monitoring committee is to help in
policy development and to scrutinise what the assembly has done
or what the executive has done in terms of delivering the strategies
and its long-term plans. I think we see it as a role of challenge,
but a role of constructive challenge. They are there, as you are,
to help the assembly itself and the executive, the legal executive,
to deliver policies.
Q302 Chairman: Is it not a fairly
stupid arrangement, because what you are doing is that in those
regions where the party political composition is going to be pretty
close you are handing scrutiny over to a majority of opposition
people, but in those areas where you are likely to have near to
one-party control for longer period of the region you are actually
leaving scrutiny control to the majority party. You are encouraging
confrontation in those areas where there is possibly going to
be more difficulty because of changes of control, and yet in those
places where perhaps scrutiny is more important, because one group
is in control, you are going to guarantee that there is always
a majority for scrutiny of the controlling party?
Mr Scotter: I certainly understand
those arguments. On the other hand, if one had a single review
and monitoring committee which reflected the balance of the whole
assembly that would mean that some back-bench members would not
be able to be part of the review and monitoring committee. It
is a fairly fine choice. Do you give everyone something to do,
which is the role of the back-benchers, or—
Q303 Chairman: So the way in which
you have chosen the system is to keep people occupied rather than
to look at the dynamics of the way in which people interact, whether
they have narrow majorities, or whether they can be more relaxed
in their working lives?
Mr Scotter: I do not think it
is to give people a job; it is to make sure all the members of
the assembly have a real role to play in helping the leadership
and the executive develop its policy.
Q304 Mr Clelland: In examining the
political statistics are we not forgetting about the role of stakeholders
in all of this? There will be other people, politicians, on the
scrutiny committee and therefore that will influence the decision
of the committee in the end. It will not necessarily just be a
governance against opposition?
Mr Scotter: Yes, absolutely. That
will not be a requirement. There is the facility to co-opt stakeholders
onto committees. Members of the assembly will have to be the majority
on any sub-committee, but, yes, there is room to get a different
set of views than necessarily the political views onto those committees.
Q305 Christine Russell: Could I turn
to the power of the elected assemblies, because you seemed to
indicate earlier that you did not envisage any greater powers
and responsibilities being given to the elected assembly, yet
in the draft Bill the Secretary of State is actually given quite
wide powers to increase the powers and functions of regional assemblies.
Would it be fair to say that really this is just a starting point
and, in fact, more powers, more responsibilities, more functions
will be given in the future?
Mr Allan: The package of powers
which the Government is proposing to give to elected regional
assemblies now is what is set out in the Bill and the policy paper,
and I am not expecting that to change between now and when the
Bill is introduced, but this is, we hope, a long-term piece of
legislation which allows for elected regional assemblies to be
introduced and people vote for them in all the English regions,
which could potentially take a while. So we asked ourselves the
question, if any other functions are to be introduced should that
be a matter that would require completely fresh legislation at
any point in the future or should we have some sort of mechanism
for things to be added later? That does not mean that the Government
has got proposals for further things now, but might have at some
point in the future. So that is why that mechanism is there, and
it does, of course, require, first of all, consultation of a formal
kind and orders to be approved by Parliament by affirmative resolutions;
so it is not the case of the Government just doing it.
Sir Paul Beresford: So we are going to
have a little white elephant struggling to become a big white
elephant!
Q306 Christine Russell: If that is
true, one of the main concerns that has been expressed over this
Bill is that, in fact, the regional assemblies will take powers
away from local government. Would it not therefore be better to
incorporate into the legislation from the outset the measures,
reassurances, whatever, to allay the fears of local government?
Mr Allan: I understand those fears—they
are often voiced—but the reality is that the one function
that the Bill does take from local government is the fire and
rescue service, but that is the exception that proves the general
rule that this is not about taking functions from local government
but taking them from central government and from quangos.
Q307 Mr Betts: Can I intervene on
that. Surely local government has a right to be concerned, because
that is the one significant change in the issue of power from
the White Paper to the draft Bill. I can quote you other areas
where powers that were going to be given have not been given.
So local government is bound to be twitchy that the direction
in which we seem to be moving from the White Paper to the draft
Bill is, in fact, a move to take powers away from local government?
Mr Allan: As you say, that concern
has been voiced, but it is a concern, I think, about changes there
might be in the future rather than anything the Government is
proposing now. I think that the answer on safeguards is the requirement
for consultation, which, as I said, is formal, and a requirement
for a parliamentary order approved by both Houses. So if there
were any move to transfer any further function from local government
it certainly could not be done by stealth.
Q308 Christine Russell: What about
power to compel others to cooperate? There is nothing in the proposed
legislation to compel unwilling partners or organisations to engage
with these things?
Mr Allan: The assembly has a very
wide general power to do various things, but, as you point out,
that is not a power to make other people do things. The powers
to make other people do things, or whatever, are always very specifically
expressed in the Bill in particular circumstances, and I think
that is the right approach.
Q309 Chairman: What about scrutiny?
If you are going to do effective scrutiny one of the problems
for local government in its scrutiny role is that it does not
have the same powers that Parliament has to insist that witnesses
come and that people send papers things to the committee. Would
it not be scrutiny effective if at least they had powers to command
the witnesses to attend and provide information?
Mr Allan: Yes. There is a certain
power on that in the Bill. Ian.
Mr Scotter: Clause 77 of the Bill
allows RMCs and RMC sub-committees to compel evidence, but that
is from people associated with the assembly (the employees, the
members, the leader), not people from outside bodies. The RMC
is mainly about looking at the work of the assembly and how that
fits in with the rest of the region, not for scrutinising other
outside bodies.
Q310 Chairman: So if some outside
body is very critical of what is going on, you cannot compel them
to give evidence, you can simply listen to what they say, and
any attempt to find out whether their criticism is based on any
factual basis and, if they refuse to provide the information,
tough?
Mr Scotter: I think that is right.
I imagine someone in that position would have some evidence and
be wanting to present it to the assembly rather than withhold
it, but certainly you are right, there is no power to—
Q311 Chris Mole: The worst regional
body for its lack of accountability is probably the strategic
health authority. Why has no effort been made to give them some
accountability to the regional assembly?
Mr Allan: The assembly is not
going to be responsible for running the National Health Service.
Q312 Chairman: It is supposed to
produce a health strategy, is it not?
Mr Allan: Yes.
Q313 Chris Mole: So will it have
the powers of some of the people from the strategic health authority?
Mr Allan: It will certainly have
the power to invite them to come to give evidence.
Q314 Chairman: Most people have the
power to invite them. Whether they turn up is another matter?
Mr Allan: I would have thought
that that invitation would be quite significant and anybody that
wanted to preserve its public reputation in the region would think
twice about not turning up.
Q315 Chairman: Presumably the government
officials from the regional bodies would be very happy to come
and would be very forthcoming with the information that they provide?
Mr Allan: I would imagine they
would have to ask their Secretary of State's agreement to do that
in the usual way, but I know that at present Jonathan Blackie
quite regularly turns up to talk to the existing regional assembly.
Mr Blackie: We have almost daily
contact. I would like to . . . I think it is important we give
the impression that this is a dynamic process and people want
to participate. We have several regional groups involving the
assembly ourselves, local authorities—
Chairman: I understand the dynamics of
it, I understand that most people are delighted to come to a parliamentary
select committee, but every so often you come across somebody
who does not want to come, and it helps if you have the powers
to send for them.
Q316 Mr Sanders: On the stakeholder
involvement and co-ordination, how do the proposed statutory duties
of elected regional assemblies to consult and engage with stakeholders
go beyond mere box ticking exercises; and, in particular, how
do the proposals ensure effective collaboration between assemblies
and local authorities?
Mr Scotter: Local authorities
are one of the stakeholders that are listed. I cannot remember
the exact clause, but somewhere around clause 49 or 50. Local
authorities are one of the assembly participants; they must be
involved in the work of the assembly. There is nothing in the
draft Bill which addresses the issue you raise, but, of course,
there is a great deal of—the Secretary of State will be
able to issue guidance on how assemblies should use their powers,
and I would expect that to very much—
Q317 Mr Sanders: Should it not be
left up to the elected assembly?
Mr Scotter: I do not think the
guidance will say—in the same way as I was saying earlier
about stakeholders—I do not think it will say, "You
must do X, Y and Z", it will present models for engagement
and emphasise the importance of proper engagement and partnership
working with local authorities.
Q318 Mr Sanders: It is also proposed
that stakeholders may be co-opted as members of review and monitoring
committees and may even be given voting rights. Have such rights
been given to non-elected persons elsewhere and, if so, what has
the experience of this level of stakeholders involvement been?
Mr Scotter: There are very similar
provisions for local government which were put in place by the
2003 Local Government Act, so they are very new provisions and
we do not have any information about the use of those provisions
yet by local authorities. I suspect local authorities are still
looking at them and thinking about them.
Q319 Chairman: You may not have any
real evidence, but have you one example where they have used those
powers?
Mr Scotter: No, I do not have
an example with me.
| 
