---

Local Government (Boundaries) (Northern Ireland) Order 2006

7.21 pm

The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office (Lord Rooker) rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 22 March be approved [Considered in Grand Committee on 18 April].

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move that this House consider the Local Government (Boundaries) (Northern Ireland) Order 2006, a draft of which was laid before the House on 22 March. The Grand Committee considered the order in some detail on 18 April.

I will be brief and reserve my longer remarks to when I answer points in the debate. The purpose of the draft Local Government (Boundaries) (Northern Ireland) Order 2006 is to set the context for a review of local government boundaries in Northern Ireland. It will enable the number of local government districts to be reduced from 26 to seven. The new districts will be the starting point for the review of local government boundaries. The order also provides for the appointment of a local government boundaries commissioner. This is an important measure to bring local government arrangements in Northern Ireland into the 21st century, and forms a major step in the Government's programme to modernise and reform central and local government in Northern Ireland.

The reorganisation will result in a smaller number of councils but much stronger local government, with a greater role, a greater list of enhanced functions, significant streamlining of local public services and, we believe, better value for money for the ratepayers and taxpayers of Northern Ireland.

The order introduces the seven new local government districts by reference to the current 26. It sets out how the seven are constructed and provides for those districts to be divided into wards. There is a requirement to appoint a local government boundaries commissioner, who will recommend the final boundaries, the names of the seven districts and the number, boundaries and names of the wards into which each district is to be divided. The order also
 
26 Apr 2006 : Column 213
 
introduces a provision setting out the functions of the commissioner and providing for him to submit his final report within such a period as the department may direct.

The order also sets out the rules in accordance with which the commissioner should make his recommendations and, in particular, provides that a local government district should be divided into 60 wards. The commissioner shall have some flexibility to divide a district into between 55 and 65 wards, if he considers it desirable, taking into account the size, population and physical diversity of the district, and the representation of the rural and urban electorates within the district. The commissioner shall regulate his procedures and make his recommendations as specified in a new Schedule 4 to the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 1972.

This matter is being consulted on in Northern Ireland over a substantial period of time. The whole issue was started by the Assembly when it was sitting. The decision that the Government finally reached followed consultation, the majority of responses to which supported the Government's view on seven councils. It is true that the political class of Northern Ireland did not do that, but this is not constructed to suit the political class of Northern Ireland; it is designed to suit the people of Northern Ireland.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 22 March be approved [Considered in Grand Committee on 18 April].—(Lord Rooker.)

Lord Smith of Clifton rose to move, as an amendment to the Motion, at end to insert "but this House regrets that the arrangements proposed for seven councils will not provide sufficient local identity, engagement, accountability for decisions or accessibility of the public to political representatives, as expressed by the majority of parties in Northern Ireland and the Northern Ireland Local Government Association".

The noble Lord said: My Lords, I thank the Minister for introducing this order. He set the tone when he said that this was done not for the political class of Northern Ireland but for the people. That is an interesting concept, divorcing the people from their elected representatives.

We welcome the overall aim of refurbishing the system of local government in Northern Ireland and adding to its powers—and, among other considerations, there is a clear need to strengthen the powers and responsibilities of local authorities and to cull the numbers from the existing 26 local councils. The problem is that the proposed reduction to only seven authorities is far too drastic. The figure of seven is opposed by all the political parties except Sinn Fein, as well as by the Northern Ireland Local Government Association.

The Government have proposed to create seven unwieldy super-authorities, covering vast tracts of territory. Those authorities will be far too remote from the citizenry and far too inaccessible to them. In Grand Committee, both the noble Viscount, Lord Brookeborough, and the noble Lord, Lord Lyell, questioned the sheer
 
26 Apr 2006 : Column 214
 
impracticability of the size of the authorities, which will artificially seek to embrace very disparate sets of communities.

As I said in Grand Committee, when one is contriving to devise a democratic system of local government, much depends on getting the balance right between the two competing principles of, on the one hand, facilitating public participation and accountability and, on the other, efficiency and the management and administration. These two operational principles are inherently opposed to each other and the trick in a democracy is to manage that tension effectively.

This order, with its proposal for only seven councils, fails lamentably to do that. The Government have decided to elevate the quest for efficiency way above a concern for nurturing public participation and civic pride. The Minister gave the game away in Grand Committee when he cited, somewhat desperately, the support of the CBI, the Institute of Directors, the chambers of commerce and the General Consumer Council, among others. As I later commented, unlike political parties, all of which, bar one, oppose the reduction to seven, these pressure groups have never been known to promote local democracy—it is not part of their core business. Indeed, from their perspective, they would probably prefer just one single authority, which would make it so much more convenient when tendering for contracts. With respect, the noble Lord's response to my point did not convince me.

It would have been better to have gone for between 10 and 15 councils. That number would have been much more conducive to fostering a sense of belonging and would have helped to create a sense of identity. The vast swathes of land that each of the seven councils will cover will make democratic political activity difficult to sustain. Evening meetings will necessarily be convened in what are for many councillors remote centres, which will make attendance extremely difficult, especially in winter.

What sort of person will be able to contemplate standing for election? Will the councils be sequestrating school buses to make circuitous journeys to gather up far-flung councillors? What are the Government's proposals for facilitating communications? These, and similar consequences, have not been given a moment's thought. E-mails, phone calls and other modern telecommunications may well serve for global business, but they are poor proxies for face-to-face human interaction, which will be severely reduced by the excessively geographically large councils that this order creates.

Finally, I have a more general point. This sort of constitutional reform should have been dealt with by primary legislation. A Bill can be amended; an order can only be rejected in toto or regretted, which is the approach I am having recourse to this evening. This is a poor substitute for democratic scrutiny but it is all of a piece with the Government's policy of truncating the operation of democracy wherever possible. I beg to move.
 
26 Apr 2006 : Column 215
 

Moved, as an amendment to the Motion, at end to insert "but this House regrets that the arrangements proposed for seven councils will not provide sufficient local identity, engagement, accountability for decisions or accessibility of the public to political representatives, as expressed by the majority of parties in Northern Ireland and the Northern Ireland Local Government Association".—(Lord Smith of Clifton).

7.30 pm

Lord Glentoran : My Lords, I thank the Minister for bringing forward this order. I also thank the noble Lord, Lord Smith of Clifton, for giving us the opportunity to debate his amendment. As far as I and my party are concerned, the most relevant point made by the noble Lord, Lord Smith, was the last one. This is an extremely difficult subject; reorganisation of local government, as I said in Committee, has been close to my heart ever since I have had the privilege of being in your Lordships' House and spokesman for Her Majesty's Opposition. I am absolutely certain that reorganisation is right; I am less certain—even my party and I do not agree to the nearest digit—about the ideal number of local authorities. Inevitably but sadly, we are in the strange, very undemocratic situation, in which the Government bring forward a number that nobody likes very much and we have only two alternatives. One is to say no and try to vote it out, which I think is absolutely wrong; the other is to accept what the Government say, which is also probably absolutely wrong.

I know that the Minister agrees with me that these decisions should be made by the Assembly and by the people of Northern Ireland. Unfortunately, this is not possible because the Assembly is not sitting. I would very much have preferred—and it is an easy emotional wish—the Government to have refrained from introducing the order until such time as the Assembly was back and in some position to give us in this House a guide on where its views really lay. Unfortunately, that is not the position; although we and the Government can say that when the Assembly settles down to work, it can change it, we know that it will never succeed in changing it because that will need cross-party support. The complications of the voting system, with the d'Hondt agreements and so on, will prevent this change from ever taking place.

I do not believe that Sinn Fein will move from its position of wanting six or seven councils or that the unionist parties will move from their position of wanting 10 to 15. There will never be agreement on this in the Assembly in Northern Ireland, and that is very sad. Maybe it will reach agreement on a different number from that which the Minister is putting forward today. Pigs might fly. But I would rather see the reorganisation of local government getting under way now or in the very near future than let it go completely into some dustbin to be resurrected God knows when in the future when the Assembly in Belfast is able to act and legislate on it.

---