| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. However much any hon. Member might be pleased or displeased about that, it is not a matter that we need to discuss this morning.
Mr. Chope: I agree, Madam Deputy Speaker. I was just explaining the Bill's context, and part 2 of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill deals with the subject of regulatory burdens. [Interruption.] I shall give way to the hon. Member for Southampton, Test (Dr. Whitehead) if he wants to intervene.
Madam Deputy Speaker: Order. I have just reminded the hon. Gentleman that we are not discussing the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.
Mr. Chope: I am not discussing the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, Madam Deputy Speaker, and I do not intend to do so. I have spent the past two weeks discussing it in detail, but I hope that we will have the chance to discuss it further on Report. However, what I am discussing and what I want to address my remarks to is whether Government new clause 4 is consistent with the Government's avowed intent to reduce the burden of regulation on organisations and local authorities. My understanding is that one of the principles of good regulation that the Government avow is that legislation should not be duplicatory or exhortative and that it should add something new to the statute book that is necessary to achieve an objective. New clause 4 is basically window dressing; it has no substance in my view or in the Minister's view. If it had substance, he would have to concede that it would impose a new burden on local authorities, and he denies that it would do so. That is the case.
Mr. Forth: I hope that my hon. Friend—with his vast experience of local government, but more particularly, in the context of the constituency that he has the honour of representing—will give us just a few observations on the possible conflicts that might arise between the approach of parish councils, district councils and county councils to new clause 4 and the possibility of differences of view on how those conflicts might be resolved.
Mr. Chope: I was certainly intending to do so, but I shall do it immediately, so that we have some continuity in the debate. I have already referred in an intervention to my concern that new clause 4 lacks proportionality, as it applies to very big councils and to very small ones. The Minister referred to the fact that the Greater London authority has not been included because there will be a review of GLA powers, but when one looks at new clause 4 in detail, one sees the phrase:
If the GLA was included in new clause 4(6), when the GLA's functions were changed, the proposal would fit completely. I do not believe the Minister's explanation that, because the GLA's powers and functions will be reviewed, it should not be included in new clause 4.
10 Mar 2006 : Column 1071
I find it ironic that the largest local authority is excluded, but the smallest parish council in the country is included. Parish councils are finding it increasingly difficult to get volunteers to serve on them, because of the burden on regulation. This is going to be another burden on them. They cannot afford to employ a parish clerk, but parish councillors will have to consider the report that emanates from Government and try to work out what the implications might be. For example, in my area, Burton parish council and Hurn parish council organise Christmas carol concerts on the green every year, and they may have to think about whether they should, in accordance with new clause 4, put up Christmas lights that will obviously burn energy and might have an adverse effect on the emission of greenhouses gases. [Interruption.] As my right hon. Friend the Member for Bromley and Chislehurst suggests, they might consider investing in a windmill that could be used to provide the power for the lights during the Christmas period provided that there is enough wind blowing.
11 am
Mr. Hurd: I have listened to my hon. Friend's argument about local councils and parish councils very carefully, and I understand it. Surely, however, the one requirement in new clause 4 that we have not discussed is the only real requirement. That is the requirement on central Government to think about and communicate how we get smarter about the energy that we produce and how we consume it. In the context of a Government who are widely considered to have underperformed on this issue, does he not welcome that requirement?
Mr. Chope: My hon. Friend is on to a very good point. The Government have underperformed compared with what they said they would do. The comments by my hon. Friend and those on the Opposition Front Bench are apposite. The Government talk the talk, but do not walk the walk. They certainly do not produce the legislation.
I fear, however, that my hon. Friend has been slightly deluded by the impact that he thinks that new clause 4 will have. The only burden or responsibility that the new clause places on the Secretary of State is that he should produce an energy measures report and, from time to time, produce a revised energy measures report. That leaves things totally to his discretion. The new clauses says that an
They are not Government measures; we always see that the Government do not want to bind themselves with the same constraints that they want to impose on everybody else. For example, the principles of the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill do not extend to Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs, although it is probably one of the biggest functionaries imposing regulation.
Similarly, this new clause does not impose any regulations on Government Departments, but it imposes them on local authorities. It does not just leave it to local authorities to exercise their discretion and use their own knowledge as to whether they think greenhouse gas emissions are a life-and-death issue for our planet, but second-guesses what they might say. It refers to measures that not only "would" but
Why should an elected local council have to agree with the Secretary of State's opinion about something when it disagrees?
Mr. Hurd: My hon. Friend makes an excellent point about the parameters of the energy measures report containing information on local authority measures. I take that point completely. However, may I illustrate the potential value of the provision? When I asked the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what her view was on the Braintree initiative, I found out that she did not know anything about it. I found that extraordinary. Surely this exercise would be of value in bringing to the attention of central Government some of the innovation and good practice that is out there, not least because that might feed through eventually into the Treasury and the opportunity to stimulate the national strategy for energy efficiency.
Mr. Chope: Again, I understand my hon. Friend's point. I will not call him naive because he comes from a very distinguished political family, and he knows a lot about the issue. However, I had the privilege of being a Minister for a time, and all I can say is that we delude ourselves if we think that Ministers will find out about the good things that parish councils do just through the bureaucratic network. The way that they will find out about the good things that are going on in, for example, Braintree is if the Member of the constituency concerned raises the issue in the House, puts it to a Minister, tables an early-day motion or secures an Adjournment debate.
Mr. Forth: May I suggest another couple of approaches? Any local authority that believes that it has a very good approach to these matters could either set up a consultancy organisation and sell their ideas or could go to the famous Local Government Association, which apparently supports the Bill enthusiastically, and disseminate good practice through that body. Local authorities can bypass central Government altogether. They can do their own thing at a local level. Does my hon. Friend not agree that that would be a much more efficacious approach?
Mr. Chope: I agree absolutely. That is what responsible local authorities will do. I do not agree with the Greater London authority and the Mayor about much, but we have already heard that they are now apparently so exemplary in the way that they perform these functions that the Government do not want to include them in the provisions of the new clause.
Trust is one of the new themes of the Conservative party.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |