|
Division
No.
41] Question
accordingly agreed to.
Clause 71
ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause
72Community
involvement 5.30
pm Dan
Rogerson (North Cornwall) (LD): I beg to move amendment
112, in
clause 72, page 52, line 32, leave
out from ‘must’ to end of line 35 and insert
‘consult with payers of domestic and non-domestic rates
and their elected representatives and prepare and publish a statement
of their policies as to how they will involve the public in this
process.’.
The
Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss the
following: amendment 115, in clause 72,
page 52, line 35, at end
insert— ‘(1A) A statement
under subsection (1) must include policies as to the involvement of
each of the following authorities whose area falls wholly or partly
within the region— (a) a
county council; (b) a
metropolitan district
council; (c) a district council
for an area for which there is no county
council; (d) a National Park
authority; (e) the Broads
Authority; (f) the Council of
the Isles of Scilly; (g) parish
councils.’.
Amendment 113,
in
clause 72, page 52, line 36, leave
out subsection
(2). Amendment
114, in
clause 72, page 53, line 1, leave
out subsection
(3). Clause
stand
part.
Dan
Rogerson: Welcome back to the Chair, Mr.
Illsley, as we continue to make our way through the Bill with
cross-party consensus. [Interruption.] Well, a
two-party consensus, at
least. We
move on to the issue of community involvement, which relates to how
responsible regional authorities will involve people in the exercise of
their functions. That is a crucial matter for whatever those new bodies
will be. It has struck me and my hon. Friend the Member for Falmouth
and Camborne that the clause allows responsible regional authorities to
define for themselves who should be involved. That definition will then
be referred to the Secretary of State, but it is really left to those
who will carry out the function to determine who they will consult
about how well they are doing. That does not seem robust enough in
terms of allowing people in the relevant regions to scrutinise what
their regional authorities are doing on their behalf. The amendments
seek to address the
issue. Amendment
112 states that those who pay tax to local authorities and their
elected representatives at all levels, which include, for example,
parish councils, would have to be consulted on a regional
authority’s proposals for its region. Amendment 115, which was
tabled after consulting the county councils network, is an alternative
way of addressing the issue, and was tabled for the purposes of debate.
It sets out in a more detailed way the sorts of authorities that might
be included. The amendments are not necessarily prescriptive, but they
are intended to prompt debate. We feel that there should be a
little more prescription that clearly sets out that all the people in a
region and their democratically elected representatives ought to be
consulted about what is being proposed for their region, as opposed to
allowing the regional bodies to determine who they will ask
about whether they are doing a good job. Amendments 113 and
114 are consequential
amendments. On
amendment 112, I would like to hear more from the Government about who
they feel should be consulted and why, and what checks, other than the
Secretary of State rubber-stamping what comes from the regional
authorities, will be in place. People who live in the relevant regions,
and who pay local and national taxes that fund the regional
authorities’ work, need to feel confident that their views are
being taken into
account.
Mr.
Jackson: We will support the amendment, principally
because a clause that supports community involvement, such as clause
72, needs to use more circumspect language. It is inappropriate to use
a phrase such as “have an interest” in that context,
because it refers to a value judgment of an interest that someone might
have. An interest can have one meaning for one person and a different
meaning for another person. The definition and terminology are too
loose, and for that reason alone we are minded not to support the
clause.
Mr.
Raynsford: The hon. Gentleman said he believed that there
was a need for more circumspect language. Will he tell the Committee
why it is appropriate to
support an amendment that refers to the domestic rates, which, as I
understand it, were abolished some 20 years ago? Is that really
circumspect
language?
Mr.
Jackson: Well, the Liberal Democrats are nothing if not
mischievous, and I suspect they are attempting to keep esteemed and
statesmanlike parliamentarians and Privy Counsellors, such as the right
hon. Gentleman, awake and abreast of the debate. I have to say that I
had not spotted that particular mistake myself, but I suspect that the
Liberal Democrats will now be seeking a new legislation drafting
intern.
Notwithstanding
the deliberate error, the substance of the amendment is correct.
However, the need for a wider and more focused consultation should be
more explicit in the Bill. Linked with that is amendment 115, which is
explicit. We all have a great deal of time for our colleagues in the
county council network—I suspect that the right hon. Member for
Greenwich and Woolwich has fewer colleagues in that network than he had
two weeks ago—so the Opposition support this amendment. Although
we believe that it is important to have significant community
involvement, the wording of the clause is too loose. The amendment
would ameliorate that deficit, and on that basis we support
it.
Ms
Winterton: Well, Mr. Illsley, what can I say?
On the one hand the Opposition say that the wording is too loose and on
the other they want to replace it with wording on a subject that does
not even exist. It is beyond belief. Seriously, we need to consider how
prescriptive this Committee should be about the consultation. I say
that because the amendment tabled by the hon. Member for Falmouth and
Camborne would have the effect of removing from the consultation some
non-governmental bodies that might have an interest in the subject
matter of the strategy. I do not think that any of us wants to see that
happening. It might be important that in some areas it is not just
domestic and non-domestic ratepayers who are
consulted. In
the other place, we gave a commitment that we would issue guidance
about types of bodies that should be involved in the process. However,
I do not think that it is appropriate to attempt to set that out in the
Bill itself. I therefore urge that the Committee rejects these
amendments and supports the clause standing part of the
Bill.
Dan
Rogerson: I seek your guidance, Mr. Illsley,
about whether it might be possible to call for a separate vote on
amendment 115 and not on amendment 112, which is the initial
amendment. With
his usual eye for detail, the right hon. Member for Greenwich and
Woolwich has hit upon a slight drafting error in amendment 112. It just
goes to show that in discussion, it pays to be a little clearer when
drafting such things. The principle behind the amendment is clear. I do
not like to use the word taxpayers to describe residents of an area,
but those who contribute to funds that will pay for work on behalf of
their area should be consulted, as should their elected representatives
at every
level.
Mr.
Curry: I get slightly squeamish when I see the words
“parish councils”. Some parish councils cover cities of
15,000 people. The town councils of Ripon and
Skipton are both parish councils in constitutional terms. The village of
300 people in which I live has a parish council. I had better not say
what I think of it, but I would not entrust it with cutting the grass
along the river. I am slightly
concerned— [Interruption.] There is no point
in being daft. Some councils are very effective and others are rather
less so, to use the words of the Bill. What parish councils does the
hon. Gentleman have in mind? We could spend a lifetime on
consulting.
Dan
Rogerson: The whole point of community involvement is that
information is made available and people have the chance to respond. If
smaller parish councils choose not to respond, that is within their
rights. Of course there will be capacity issues. As the right hon.
Gentleman pointed out, there are some quite large parish councils. In
my constituency, Truro city council is a parish council, although those
who do not know the area well might think that is a principal
authority. It would no doubt want to contribute. Parish councils are
made up of elected representatives of local people. There will not be a
problem if they choose to respond and it would be
welcome.
Mr.
Raynsford: Will the hon. Gentleman give
way?
Dan
Rogerson: I will in a second or two. The Minister said she
felt that the amendments were too prescriptive. There is a certain
irony in the Government saying that they want to draft things loosely
when a huge amount of the Bill goes into great detail about how
councils should reply to petitions. To repeat the phrase used by the
right hon. Member for Skipton and Ripon, let a thousand flowers
bloom. The
intention behind the amendments, particularly amendment 115, was to say
that such authorities must be consulted. We do not want to say that
other people cannot be consulted, but to be a bit more prescriptive
about those who will be. Should regional authorities want to consult
other people or organisations, they would be perfectly able to do
so.
Mr.
Raynsford: Does it not show a certain wooliness of
thinking on the part of the Liberal party that two of its amendments
would require that every one of the 8,000 parish councils be
consulted—some of which may not be paragons of good, efficient
local administration, as the right hon. Member for Skipton and Ripon
pointed out—while amendment 112 would ensure that nobody who
pays council tax would be
consulted?
Dan
Rogerson: I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his helpful
intervention. There is a serious point about the involvement of parish
councils, which I feel strongly about. It is clear from speaking to the
National Association of Local Councils that parish councils do great
work in their communities. They are quite often the first port of call
because parish councillors are often well known and visible in the
community, sometimes more so than principal authority councillors. I do
not think that there is any harm in saying that they should be written
to. Whether or not they hold a parish meeting for a whole day to decide
on their response is up to them.
Mr.
Curry: Following the hon. Gentleman’s point about
the lowest level of democracy, is he aware of the lengths to which
parish councillors go to ensure that they do not have to have an
election because doing so costs money? Little village parish councils
go to huge lengths to ensure that the number of people standing
corresponds exactly to the number of vacancies. The idea of having an
election is enough to give apoplexy to the entire village
community.
Dan
Rogerson: I thought we were talking about consultations
rather than elections. I am interested to hear about the practices used
in parish council elections in the right hon. Gentleman’s part
of Yorkshire. The 70 parish councils in my constituency, some
of which go down to parish meeting size, take such issues very
seriously and there is usually a great deal of involvement. There are
perhaps one or two parish councils that are not contested, but I can
think of some recent elections that have been highly contentious and
vigorously fought. I do not want to be sidetracked, but I think parish
councils are worth getting involved in, and there is no harm in listing
parish councils as bodies that need and ought to be
consulted.
Mr.
Jackson: To help the hon. Gentleman, the term
“parish council” can be generic. A township of about
12,000 people in my constituency that was developed by Peterborough
Development Corporation is an urban area, but it is represented by a
body called Bretton parish council. The people who are elected to it
would of course want an input to the regional strategy in my
area—currently, my constituency is within a sustainable
community area and has a significant amount of housing mooted for it.
Parish councils are not just about representing the 60 residents of
Little Snoring by the Tamar; they can be quite large entities. Such
local democracies are as close as many ordinary voters who are not
interested in politics get to civic
administration.
5.45
pm
Dan
Rogerson: The hon. Gentleman makes a point that was made
by his right hon. Friend the Member for Skipton and Ripon and others.
There are some large parish councils. Newquay town council in my
constituency represents about 20,000 people and is a significant
body. It
would be good if the Bill included a provision that such important
local bodies will be consulted. Nothing in the amendment says that
other bodies could not be consulted, which the Minister seemed to
imply. On that basis, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the
amendment.
Amendment,
by leave, withdrawn.
Amendment
proposed: 115, in
clause 72, page 52, line 35, at
end insert— ‘(1A) A
statement under subsection (1) must include policies as to the
involvement of each of the following authorities whose area falls
wholly or partly within the
region— (a) a county
council; (b) a metropolitan
district council; (c) a
district council for an area for which there is no county
council; (d) a National Park
authority; (e) the Broads
Authority; (f) the Council of
the Isles of Scilly; (g) parish
councils.’.—(Dan
Rogerson.) The
Committee divided: Ayes 6, Noes
8.
| 
