| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 7, I shall speak also to Amendment No. 42. The amendments seek to make explicit on the face of the Bill precisely who must be consulted by the Secretary of State before he calls a referendum. The list includes business, the culture and voluntary sectors, regional chambers and local authorities. We believe the amendments bring clarity to the otherwise vague requirement for the Secretary of State to consider the level of interest in a region.
We have learnt from experience—and certainly from what has been said in our debates—that it would be unsatisfactory to leave the soundings exercise entirely to a subjective judgment of the Secretary of State. Before a major constitutional question is put to the electorate of a region in a referendum, it is right that Parliament should scrutinise the consultations carried out by the Secretary of State. If I have understood the Minister correctly, we shall get an opportunity to do so, but we have not yet heard of the format under which that will take place.
The amendments ensure greater transparency. In Committee, the Minister agreed about the importance of openness and promised that a summary of reasons for the Secretary of State's decision would be published. Will there be an opportunity to scrutinise the basis for the taking of that decision and can the Minister give any further assurances on Report? I beg to move.
Lord Rooker: My Lords, all my assurances will be kept. I have no new assurances to give and I do not need to qualify the assurances I have given already. I hope that that will be helpful.
The bodies specified in Amendment No. 7 which were in a position to comment on the level of interest in a region have been able to put forward their views as part of the soundings exercise. I am informed that many such bodies are among the 5,000 or so which have responded.
In Committee, I said that the Secretary of State would explain to Parliament his decision on which region or regions should undergo a local government review, with a view to holding a referendum, after the Bill receives Royal Assent. We intend to publish a summary of the views received during the soundings exercise.
Amendment No. 42, which the noble Baroness did not say much about, is similar to a group of amendments debated in Committee. Its effect would be to exclude—this is perhaps nitpicking, but we are talking about legislation—the consideration of views, information and evidence from other groups,
Since last year we have actively sought the views of individuals and organisations. We do not believe that the amendment is needed. Many of the bodies listed in Amendment No. 7 have been covered and have had ample opportunity to submit their views. I hope that they have all done so and that no one will be missing when we look at the final list.
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I thank the Minister for his reply. Quoting from his letter, in his earlier reply to the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, the Minister explained how the responses would be judged. It is interesting that the consultees were not told how their responses would be judged. For instance, if a voluntary sector body had been told that the quality of its response would be judged on how it had communicated and taken soundings from other people in its organisation, we might have seen a great deal more activity.
A body that I know of was approached but could not afford to take the necessary kind of soundings. Its reply will be considered as simply a statement from a particular voluntary organisation and will be judged as not having taken more soundings. However, the Secretary of State could subjectively—we do not know—simply say that because the body represents ", its reply must be the view of "'s members; its membership is Y and therefore that must be the view of that many people. We do not know the answers to these questions or how the replies will be judged.
What we have been told about this issue is unsatisfactory. I take on board what the Minister said about Amendment No. 42. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Lord Rooker moved Amendment No. 9:
The noble Lord said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 9 I shall speak also to Amendment No. 10. The amendments are required to tidy up the amendment moved by the noble Baroness, Lady Blatch, to Clause 1(6) which was agreed to in Committee. The Government do not seek to overturn the amendment. We are happy to retain the revised Clause 1(6) within the Bill provided that we can make these two small changes to Clause 1. The amendments are designed to remove slight inconsistencies and to give full effect to the noble Baroness's amendment.
Amendment No. 9 seeks to make a small improvement to the drafting; Amendment No. 10 addresses an inconsistency between subsection (8) and
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, I shall not ask the Minister to go into further detail. I am grateful to him for accepting the amendment and for the letter he sent me in advance.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
The Deputy Speaker (Lord Elton): My Lords, if Amendment No. 10 is agreed to, I shall not be able to call Amendment No. 11 standing in the name of the noble Baroness, Lady Hanham.
Lord Rooker moved Amendment No. 10:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Baroness Hamwee moved Amendment No. 12:
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I have spoken to this amendment. I beg to move.
Baroness Carnegy of Lour: My Lords, the noble Baroness spoke fully to this amendment with Amendment No. 1. Since then, after reading it carefully, as a member of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee I should like to ask the noble Baroness about the four order-making powers in the amendment, with which I am sure she is familiar.
Subsection (2) relates to the order that the Secretary of State may give to trigger a referendum. Under subsection (8), he may, by order, vary or revoke the order. Under subsection (9) he may make such provision as he thinks appropriate in connection with a referendum. Of particular importance among the features of that order is that, under subsection (10), he may make provision for the creation of offences.
I am sure that the noble Baroness is familiar with her amendment and I should like to ask her what status these orders will have. Will they need parliamentary approval? If so, will that be by negative or affirmative resolution? I should like the noble Baroness to comment particularly on the order under subsection (9) because that makes provision for the creation of offences.
The Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee has not had time to consider the amendment because it has only recently been tabled. That is why I am asking these questions.
"( ) The second condition is that the Secretary of State has concluded on the basis of evidence available to him that there is substantial support from the business community, regional chambers, local authorities, cultural and voluntary sector and local electors within the region for the holding of such a referendum and such evidence has been laid before both Houses of Parliament."
Page 2, line 6, leave out second "that" and insert "the"
Page 2, leave out lines 10 and 11 and insert "If the Secretary of State has cause to think that the level of interest has changed materially as mentioned in subsection (6), that subsection does not apply but he must not make an order under subsection (1) unless for the purposes of subsection (4) he considers—"
After Clause 1, insert the following new clause—
"LOCAL GOVERNMENT REFERENDUMS
(1) This section applies if the Secretary of State makes an order under section 1 to cause a referendum to be held in a region about the establishment of an elected assembly for that region.
(2) The Secretary of State must by order cause a referendum to be held in each county area in the region about the government's proposals for the structure of local government in that area.
(3) A county area is an area in the region in relation to which both a county council and one or more district councils have functions.
(4) But if the government's proposals for a county area include an option providing for a local authority whose area includes any part of the area of more than one county area, the county area for the purposes of this section is the combined area of each of those county areas.
(5) The government's proposals for the structure of local government—
(a) are such of the recommendations of the Boundary Committee for England made in pursuance of a direction under Part 2 of this Act as the Secretary of State thinks appropriate subject to such modifications (if any) as he proposes to make in pursuance of section 15(3);
(b) must include at least two options for structural change (within the meaning of Part 2 of the Local Government Act 1992) in relation to each county area in the region.
(6) The date of a referendum held in pursuance of an order under subsection (2) must be—
(a) specified in the order;
(b) the same date as the date specified in the order under section 1.
(7) An order under subsection (2) must not be made before the end of the period of 6 weeks starting with the day on which the Secretary of State receives the recommendations of the Boundary Committee in pursuance of a direction under Part 2 of this Act.
(8) The Secretary of State by order—
(a) may vary an order under subsection (2);
(b) must revoke such an order if he revokes the order under section 1.
(9) A Minister of the Crown may by order make such provision as he thinks appropriate in connection with a referendum held in pursuance of an order under subsection (2).
(10) An order under subsection (9) may—
(a) make provision for the creation of offences;
(b) apply or incorporate with or without modifications or exceptions any provision of any enactment (whenever passed or made and including this Act) relating to elections or referendums;
(c) modify any provision of Chapter 2 of Part 7 of the 2000 Act as it applies to a referendum held in pursuance of an order under section 1."
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page