Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Rooker: My Lords, the people of the north-east will not be troubled again on this issue for at least seven years. That is what the Statement said and what the legislation requires.
I fully accept what the right reverend Prelate said about Newcastle. I am told when I am in the area that I have to look at Newcastle and Gateshead together as a whole. There has been a renaissance beyond belief, compared with what was happening 10 or more years ago. One of these days our London-centric press will find out about that and the countryside of Northumbria. We shall have to make sure that they do not wreck it.
8 Nov 2004 : Column 682
I freely admit that the people did not like what was on offer and they have spoken. That is their choice.
The Earl of Onslow: My Lords, I was up first. Could the reason why the proposal was turned down be that people looked at devolution in Scotland and Wales and found it wanting? Is it not also true that the Government were completely misinformed about the general state of opinion? If they had had any idea of how people were thinking, they would not have held the referendum if they thought they would lose at that level.
On the issue of local government, the counties and boroughs should have the power. That is the old system and one that Ethelred the Unready got right when he abolished the heptarchy and created the shire system. That has stood the test of time. Let us not adopt newfangled ideas that do not work, but give power properly to the local authorities as opposed to using them as agents of government. We should allow them to raise their own taxes when they have to so that they are responsible to their people for the money that they spend. We should do it through the old and well tried system of local government rather than adopt newfangled ideas that were thought dotty by Ethelred the Unready.
Lord Rooker: My Lords, that was a much more thoughtful question that that of the noble Lord, Lord Waddington, especially the point made by the noble Earl about local government.
There is not time to go through it, but the Statement gives examples of what we have done to devolve issues to local government. On borrowing, there is much more freedom in local government to do things for the well-being of the community rather than only doing things that are set out in Acts of Parliament. It will become apparent in the near future how much more freedom local government has. It is true that people in the northin two counties anywayhad a choice that if it were to take place it would be done only on the basis of unitary government. We did not want to impose an extra layer of government, and understand the consideration and complaints on that.
It is up to the people of Scotland and Wales to say what they think of the Welsh Assembly and the Scottish Parliament. But, as a complete outsider, I venture to say that given a choice they would not want to go back to the status quo prior to 1997.
Lord Shutt of Greetland: My Lords, this has been a very sad occasion indeed because the proposition was timid in the first place. I do not want to say, "I told you so", but I did. There has been no enthusiasm and the whole thing has been loused up by the local government changes that were to go alongside it.
This has nothing to do with local government, but is about devolving from the centre to the regions and taking matters away from quangos to give to proper elected bodies.
8 Nov 2004 : Column 683
I also think that it was a matter of timing, which was hinted at by the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee. The publication of the salaries and emoluments of Members of Parliament came at the same time as the ballot papers, and people may have thought, "We are paying enough. We don't want another crowd", even though great goodness could have come from that group of elected people.
It is also very sad that for a strange reason people may have referendumitis. I do not understand why, but that genie is out of the bottle. If that is so, we are told that we shall have to wait 20 years. I shall be 82 in 20 years' time. It beggars belief. I had hoped to see devolved government in my lifetime. But only 22 per cent voted on what some of us believe were the right lines, so does the Minister have any ideas on how that corner will be turned, whether it is 20 years or somewhere between seven and 20 years? What will light up the debate so that people will say that there is a good case for democracy at the regional level? Does the Minister have any ideas about that?
Lord Rooker: My Lords, no, but in your Lordships' House, there is nothing wrong with being 82. I hope that in 20 years we are still here debating this issue. I suspect that we probably will be. That is the only controversial thing that I shall say tonight.
During the debates on the Bill, I remember the noble Lord, Lord Shutt, saying that we had not gone far enough with the legislation. He said that he wanted to be enthused. We failed to enthuse him, as he rightly said. The hares are set off running
The Earl of Onslow: My Lords, will the Minister abolish chasing them?
Lord Rooker: My Lords, not if I have anything to do with it.
The powers were coming not from local government but central government. Those powers are currently being exercised by unelected quangos, some of which consist of directly elected politicians, but they are there on a representative or delegatory basis. We were basically collecting them together so that for the people in the region there would be an elected, democratic element in some of those decisions. We were not taking the powers from local government; they were powers that we were letting go from the centre.
Lord Grantchester: My Lords, I have two questions for my noble friend, in the spirit of moving forward. In doing so, I declare an interest as the director of the Cheshire and Warrington Economic Alliance.
My noble friend drew attention to the RDAs and the good work that they do. Can he say what plans the Government now have to make RDAs more democratically accountable? He also drew attention to the Northern Way. It is my understanding that it will focus development initiatives on cities; can my noble friend say how that will not act to the exclusion of rural
8 Nov 2004 : Column 684
areas? There is anxiety in Cheshire that that may be the case, as there is no city within the regional or sub-regional area, but a network of strong market towns.
Lord Rooker: My Lords, the answer to my noble friend's first question is that we need a period of reflection. The fact is that the referendum result has ruled out the plans for democratising some of the quangos, which include the RDAs. That was what was on offer. My noble friend asks how we will make them more democraticwell, it will not be by direct election, that is for sure. We need a period of reflection, but what has happened has put that democratisation on the back burner. I cannot give any other impression.
On the point that he made about cities, there is a host of schemes and programmes on at the moment, one of which is the "core cities" schemeor, as it prefers to be called, the "city regions" scheme, for the eight city regions of the country. Those city regions would not include the particular area that my noble friend mentioned, but they do include the rural hinterland around those cities, because an interaction is perceived between the city and the hinterland. I know that to be the case, because I visited three or four of them in the summer as part of a city regions exercise by Ministers.
With those activities, one must take account of the areas not covered by the city region, which will essentially be rural areas and market towns. I do not want to be glib about this, but the work of the Market Towns Initiative and the other work that we have underway as part of the plan will ensure that the rural areas are not left behind. The communities plan is not a south-east plan or an urban plan; it is a national plan, for the north, south, east and west of England, and is both rural and urban at the same time.
Lord Hanningfield: My Lords, I ask my question tonight as the leader of a local government with more than 30 years' experience, rather than as a Front-Bencher in this House. I agree with what my noble friend Lady Hanham said and with what my noble friend Lord Onslow said, despite competition over who was going to speak.
In this country, we have no regionsEngland is England. There was one potential region, which was the area based around Newcastle; if anywhere was going to vote for a region, it was that area. I would have said that at any time when I have been involved with local government. The rest of the regions are artificial, and no one will ever vote for them. If they would not vote for the north-east, they will never vote for any of the others. All the countries that have regional government have historical regions. No government of any kind can invent regions and get people to support them. England is a country of 2000 years' history, and people will not support artificial regions. We have counties, and our counties are bigger than the average region in Europe. The county that I lead, Essex, has 1.5 million people and is bigger than the average European region.
I believe passionately in devolvement to local government. I have argued with my own party on the matter and, fortunately, a future Conservative
8 Nov 2004 : Column 685
government would have a totally different policy from past Conservative governments on devolvement to local government, particularly if my noble friend Lady Hanham and I had anything to do with it. It is very important that we support the local government that we have and devolve powers and money to it, so that it delivers services. We should all be passionate about local government. Regional government was never going to solve problems with education systems, care for the elderly or anything like thatit is local government that can do that.
What concerns me about all this is that the Labour Government will now say, "Well, we have dropped our regional policy, so let's go ahead and reorganise local government". That is what the Conservative Party did, and I was opposed to the Conservative Party suggesting that we should reorganise local government. The United States has had the same system of local government since the declaration of independence, for 200 years. Most European countries do not reorganise local government. We have a passionate desire in this country to reorganise local government every 15 years. So please let us get on with delivering services. The Minister said that the Government would not reorganise Durham and Northumberland because of the ballot, but I would like an assurance that there will be no local government reorganisation and that they will be committed to local government and to delivering services to our people. That is what it is all about.
Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |