Mr.
Goodman: It might be a reflection of what a sad individual
I am, but I have found this debate absolutely fascinating. It has been
fascinating not because of anything I said, or even, with due respect,
because of anything the Minister said—after all, we are both
toiling workers in the vineyards respectively of the Leader of the
Opposition and the Prime Minister. The debate has not even been
fascinating because of the hon. Member for Falmouth and Camborne, well
informed though she always is. It was compelling because of the
exchanges between those two old rivals and friends, my right hon.
Friend the Member for Skipton and Ripon and the right hon. Member for
Greenwich and Woolwich.
Mr.
Curry: The mastodons.
Mr.
Goodman: Mastodons is the word. The right hon. Member for
Greenwich and Woolwich has been far more loyal this afternoon than he
was with those ridiculous petition clauses when he voted the wrong
way—I should say the right way, by accident or design. Of
course, he meant what he said this
afternoon. There
was a profound difference of philosophical approach that might
illustrate what will happen when we reach the general election,
whenever that is. On the one hand, my right hon. Friend says,
“What’s the LGA for? What’s best practice for?
Leave councils to their own devices and standards will be driven up as
they look at what each other do. A thousand flowers will bloom and by
some organic and almost ecological process, all will turn out
well,” to which the right hon. Member for Greenwich and Woolwich
says, forcefully, and with every rhetorical device and all the
expertise at his command, which is a great deal, “It
won’t work. You need the benign hand on the tiller of central
Government.” He is wise enough to know that the hand must not be
applied heavily, but his position is that we need the hand and for it
to be applied lightly—we cannot simply
devolve.
That
is the difference between the approaches of those two very experienced
parliamentarians, both of whom are very knowledgeable in their fields.
It will be the big difference at the next election, as has been
illustrated by these tiny—
Julia
Goldsworthy: Will the hon. Gentleman give
way?
Mr.
Goodman: I knew I would not get away without letting the
hon. Lady in.
Julia
Goldsworthy: It is interesting for the hon. Gentleman to
pose those diametrically opposed philosophical positions, but I am sure
that the electorate will cast its mind back to the track record of the
previous Conservative Government, and find that they probably did not
take exactly the approach he described. They might actually have
engaged in a small amount of centralisation of local authorities. Does
he agree that we should take with quite a large pinch of salt his
portrayal of the positions of his party and the Labour
party?
Mr.
Goodman: I am willing to throw a pinch of salt over my
shoulder if the hon. Lady will throw a pinch of salt over hers and
concede that the Liberal Democrats have never been in government, so
they do not have to take such decisions. We cannot automatically assume
that, had they been, they would not also have been tempted occasionally
to tread the primrose path to the hell of centralisation, so she ought
to have a little care. However, whether she thinks that such positions
are those of the two main parties or not, they are the opposites in the
debate. Naturally, we keep to our position and intend to press our
amendment to the
vote. Question
put, That the amendment be
made. The
Committee divided: Ayes 5, Noes
8.
Division
No.
27] Question
accordingly negatived.
Question
put, That the clause stand part of the Bill.
The
Committee divided: Ayes 8, Noes
5.
Division
No.
28] Question
accordingly agreed to.
Clause 31
ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause
32Powers
of National Assembly for
Wales Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
Mr.
Goodman: This is a significant clause. Those members of
the Committee who do not possess any special expertise in Welsh
affairs—of whom I have to confess I am one—may be tempted
to let it slip by without debate. However, it is significant and it
gives rise to some questions.
The Minister
has not risen to speak, so I shall say a word or two about what the
clause seems to do. It sets out a series of framework powers which
would extend the legislative competence of the Welsh Assembly by
inserting some new matters in field 12—the powers that councils
in Wales are allowed to exercise. As the briefing from the Assembly
says: “The
Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill is an
opportunity for the Assembly Government to seek framework powers that
will enable it to bring forward proposals for legislation in respect of
governance and overview and
scrutiny.” After
all, as the brief also
says: “The
Welsh Assembly Government can only go so far within the existing
legislative
framework.” So,
new powers mean new competencies. The brief sets out what those
are: “In
effect, the Welsh Assembly Government wishes the Assembly to have
legislative competence in the areas covered by the provisions of Part
II of the Local Government Act 2000. This Act introduced different
models for executive arrangements, including the Mayor, Cabinet and
Leader and Cabinet models. The executive became responsible for most
local authority functions, working within a policy framework set by the
full council. The 2000 Act also brought about the creation of overview
and scrutiny
committees”— which
we have just been
considering— “made
up of non-executive (‘backbench’) councillors, to
scrutinise the work of the executive as well as reviewing policy within
and without the council itself as they affected the local area. This
legislative competence would enable the Welsh Government to give effect
to its policies in this area following consideration of the Beecham
Review and the outcome of research commissioned into the role and
function of elected members in Welsh local
government.” I
think the key question that arises from this, which this Committee
ought to consider, and certainly should have an interest in, is what
powers the Welsh Assembly Government, or WAG—not to be confused
with other WAGs—wish to exercise. I should therefore like to ask
some questions about the intentions of the Assembly Government,
given—and I would be grateful if the Minister confirmed
this—that a Welsh Assembly Government Minister came to brief the
House informally on Tuesday on the measures that they wish to pass if
the clause is enacted. I am not aware—and I have checked with
the other Opposition party and I believe that it also is not
aware—of any briefing for this Committee. Will the Minister
outline how the process between the Assembly Government and this
Parliament is supposed to function and explain why—if I am
correct, and I accept that I may have been misinformed—no one
from this Committee was made aware of the
briefing. Apparently,
the Welsh Assembly Government, the WAG, wish to enact certain powers.
They wish to establish
“joint scrutiny
committees between neighbouring authorities”,
a
matter we have just been considering. Can the Minister confirm that
these committees will be made up of elected members only? The Welsh
Assembly Government wants to enable co-option of
“representatives from
third parties” to these scrutiny committees. It looks as if they
will not be made up of elected members only, so I may have answered my
own question. How does this equate with the principle of
accountability, if these rights are handed over to people who are not
accountable to anyone? The Welsh Assembly Government have also said
that they wish to introduce “a duty to scrutinise” across
“the whole public sector”. Would the Minister say more
about what that means? Could they, for example, summon any Minister to
appear before a local government committee? If so, is there a case to
argue that the power has been drawn rather widely? The Welsh
Assembly Government would apparently like to abolish whipping in
scrutiny committees, although how that will be achieved is not clear.
Perhaps the Minister could provide an explanation. Could the Minister
explain what the Welsh Assembly Government intend to do with such
powers? If they are devolved in relation to the proposed redesign of
political structures, will local councils be, in some way, forced to
adopt structures set by the Welsh Assembly
Government? Then
there is a desire of the Welsh Assembly Government that is hard to
understand. They wish to strengthen
“the role of the
citizen through councillor calls for action, by which local communities
can combine with their local councillor to ensure a matter is addressed
by the local
authority”. I
would be grateful if the Minister provided some clarification, and, if
she cannot do any of that instantaneously, or if the necessary
inspiration does not reach her quickly enough, perhaps she will be able
to write. We look forward with interest to hearing what she
has to
say. 2.15
pm
Sarah
McCarthy-Fry: I will certainly ask the Welsh Assembly
Government to write to the hon. Gentleman. I personally have not met
any of their members. I understand that a briefing on a framework power
was held on Tuesday 9 June at 3 pm, and that it was publicised to hon.
Members when most of us would have been preparing for our afternoon
sitting. I can only apologise for that. The policy will be subject to
consultation with the Welsh Assembly Government. We intend to give them
the powers to decide their decision-making regime. As he will know, we
have specifically excluded from the Bill anything in respect of direct
elections to executives of county and county borough councils in Wales
or the creation of a form of executive requiring direct elections. I
can only say to the hon. Gentleman that I will write to him with the
information that he
requires.
Mr.
Goodman: On the basis of what the Minister has said, we
would be minded at this stage to let the clause pass. We may wish to
return to it on
Report.
Sarah
McCarthy-Fry: I take on board what the hon. Gentleman
says, and I will certainly ensure that full information is available
before we reach that
point. Question
put and agreed
to. Clause
32 accordingly ordered to stand part of the
Bill. Clauses
33 to 51 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
Clause
52Local
Government Boundary Commission for
England Question
proposed, That the clause stand part of the
Bill.
Mr.
Goodman: It might have helped the Committee if the
official Opposition had made it clear at the start of the previous
chapter of the Bill that we regarded it as relatively uncontentious. We
take the same view of the local government boundary and electoral
change parts of the
Bill.
Julia
Goldsworthy: I echo those comments. The previous chapter
that has just been accepted mainly applies the same standards
implemented under the Companies Acts to local authorities. It is
entirely sensible for there to be that mirror. This part of the Bill
seems largely uncontroversial and sensible. Speaking as an MP who
represents an area that has been covered by local government reform and
has been undergoing the boundary-making process, I think that the
proposals contain sensible amendments. I do not think that they would
have resolved all the problems that we experienced in Cornwall, but
they address some of the issues and are a big step forward towards a
process that will be more timely and will give people confidence in the
electoral process. We broadly welcome many of the
proposals. Question
put and agreed to.
Clause
52 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Schedule
1 agreed
to. Clause
53 ordered to stand part of the
Bill Schedule
2 agreed to.
Clauses 54,
55 and 56 ordered to stand part of the
Bill.
| 
