Parliamentary scrutiny
138. If there is a case for Parliament to withdraw
from some of the more tactical local issues, there may equally
be a case for Parliament to engage more fully at the strategic
level, to legislate on and then scrutinise the balance of power
between central and local government. Sir Michael Lyons stated
in his report that he was "attracted to a model which in
time provides greater parliamentary oversight" and referred
to the suggestion made "by others"[188]
that a new parliamentary committee should be established. A number
of other witnesses to our inquiry were similarly inclined. The
LGiU, London Councils, NLGN and Professor George Jones, for instance,
all supported greater parliamentary oversight of the relationship
between central and local government, including oversight by a
select committee. In oral evidence Professor Vernon Bogdanor suggested
a role for "a joint committee of the two Houses, perhaps
analogous to the Joint Committee on Human Rights…a joint
committee on central and local relations whose function it would
be to report each year on the state of relations and the state
of local government. I think that would be of great value."[189]
Similarly, in his written evidence, Professor Tony Travers suggested
that such a committee could examine and report on issues such
as:
- the impact of legislation on
local government autonomy
- the use of regulations and other directions to
intervene in local decision-making
- the operation and limitation of local taxation
- the impact of central funding mechanisms, and
- the costs and impacts of audit and regulation.[190]
NLGN also suggested, as an alternative means of improving
Parliamentary scrutiny in this area, designating some seats for
council leaders in a reformed House of Lords.[191]
139. When we put the proposal of a Joint Committee
to monitor the balance of power between local and central government
to the Secretary of State, she replied "I remain to be convinced",
arguing that "I am never in favour of more committees unless
there is a real reason for doing it because I worry that that
takes resources and focus that ought to be properly being used
to deliver things to people and sometimes I think ordinary citizens
get a bit frustrated if everything is about process."[192]
140. Whilst we share the Secretary
of State's caution with regard to setting up new Committees in
principle, we think in this particular instance the idea has merit.
We have argued in the previous chapter in favour of putting the
Charter on a statutory basis, and requiring government Ministers
to declare the compliance of Bills with the Charter in the case
of each piece of domestic legislation. We are persuaded that establishing
a Joint Committee to monitor Government compliance with this constitutional
settlement would provide further impetus to creating and sustaining
a pendulum swing in the balance of power between central and
local government.
141. The Joint Committee would be empowered both
to scrutinise the general state of the balance of power between
central and local government, and to prompt Parliament to consider
whether particular legislation was compliant with the Charter.
To assist the Joint Committee in its latter task, similar to
the provisions under the Human Rights Act, government departments
would need to confirm on the front of domestic bills that they
complied with the local government statute.
We further recommend that
the Government direct its departments, where relevant, to include
an analysis of compliance with the local government legislation
within the impact assessment that they already undertake for each
piece of legislation.
142. Establishing a joint Committee of both Houses
would ensure the widest possible range of expertise and experience
was available to it: sitting council leaders and former chief
executives from the Lords, for example, and former Ministers and
councillors from both Houses, as well as directly elected representatives
from the Commons. More importantly, scrutiny of this new constitutional
settlement will lie in both parts of the legislature, reinforcing
its place in the nation's political life. Establishing the Joint
Committee would therefore be a very clear signal of a new status
for local government in England, potentially strengthening both
local and national democracy. To return to where we started, whilst
a constitutional settlement itself appears rather rarefied, we
believe it also offers the potential to galvanise the enhanced
local innovation and variation that could improve the lives of
local people and local communities.
186 
