§ 22. Mr. Wingfield Digbyasked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning whether, in view of the high proportion of the inhabitants of Sherborne who have signed a petition against the proposal of the RedcliffeMaud Report that Sherborne should be transferred from Dorset to West Somerset. he will give an undertaking not to implement this part of the report.
§ Mr. CroslandI am aware of this petition and also of the views of the Dorset County Council. I have made it clear, however, that boundaries will be the subject of separate consultation after the Government have reached conclusions on the structure of local government and published them in a White Paper.
§ Mr. DigbyIs the right hon. Gentleman aware of the widespread resentment there is in both these council areas about these suggestions, even among the comparative few who go to work in Somerset, and that all local councillors resent these proposals?
§ Mr. CroslandI am aware of the very strong feelings held and expressed in the petition. When it comes to the detailed discussions of boundaries, which is a later stage, I shall take these feelings into account, along, however, with other factors which are also relevant.
§ Mr. Peter WalkerWhen does the right hon. Gentleman expect the White Paper to be published?
§ Mr. CroslandIn the new year.
§ 23. Miss Quennellasked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning how many local councils and second-tier authorities he estimates would exist on the full implementation of the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Local Government.
§ Mr. CroslandThe Commission recommended that initially local councils should be set up in each present local authority area and in each parish where there is a parish council. These together number 7,844. In the three metropolitan areas suggested by the Commission, there would be 20 second-tier authorities.
§ Miss QuennellDoes the Minister not realise that the report also recommended that urban district councils, like county boroughs and municipal corporations, should qualify as local councils? Is he aware that the total is about 8,000, which does not appear to offer a significant reduction in the number of authorities, which was the principle the Government were pursuing?
§ Mr. CroslandOf course I am aware of the first point that the hon. Lady put, because I quote the precise figure, not 8,000 but 7,844. These local councils will not, under the Maud recommendations exercise the large variety of statutory functions that are currently exercised by particular types of council mentioned by the hon. Lady.
§ 24. Mr. Farrasked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning if he will extend the period within which local authorities are enabled to present their views on the RedcliffeMaud Report.
§ 26. Sir D. Rentonasked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning whether he will extend the time given for the submission by local authorities of their views on the Royal Commission on local government in England and Wales.
§ 21. Mr. Cleggasked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional 1102 Planning how many representations he has received from local authorities about the time allowed for the submission of representations on the Redcliffe-Maud Report.
§ Mr. CroslandI do not think it necessary to extend the period allowed for the submission of evidence. I received requests for an extension from 199 local authorities, mostly some time ago. But well over 1,000 authorities have now sent me their comments, including practically all the county councils and county boroughs and a majority of the urban and rural districts. I am grateful for this excellent response and for the many constructive suggestions that have been made.
§ Mr. FarrWhat is the point of rushing through this report? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Maud Report spells the end for local government as we know it and that many of us are trying to resist it and to see that local authorities have a proper chance of expressing their views?
§ Mr. CroslandThere can be no question of our being said to be rushing this report through. The Commission sat for three years, during the whole of which time there was continuous and animated discussion on all these matters. Every local authority in the country during that time formed and submitted its own considered views and we have now had some months since the report came out for people to make up their minds. We must now push ahead with all reasonable speed, to end uncertainty in local government.
§ Sir D. RentonWould the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that before giving the Government their views many local authorities had to consult other bodies in their areas? Would he also bear in mind that there is no chance whatever of legislation of this matter in this Parliament?
§ Mr. CroslandOn the latter part of that question, it has already been announced that legislation will occur in the 1971–72 Session, and not in this Parliament. On the first part of the question, the fact is that a huge majority of councils have submitted evidence to me and it is perfectly clear that the evidence has been most carefully and deeply considered.
§ Mr. BarnettWill my right hon. Friend not accede to the request to delay the publication of the White Paper, bearing in mind the urgent need to go ahead with the proposals? He says that the White Paper will be published in the new year. Does that mean January or December?
§ Mr. CroslandOn the first part of the supplementary question, as always, I take my hon. Friend's advice; I have no intention of delaying the White Paper. On the second part, "the new year" means broadly the new year.
§ 29. Mr. William Priceasked the Secretary of State for Local Government and Regional Planning how many letters he has received in support of the Maud recommendations on local government.
§ Mr. CroslandThere is almost universal agreement with the Redcliffe-Maud report that far-reaching changes in local government are now necessary. There is also widespread agreement on the need for larger authorities which will combine both town and country. I regret, however, that I cannot give an exact answer to my hon. Friend's Question. Many of the 2,000 comments that I have received approve some of the recommendations, but not others. I am now weighing up carefully all the views that have been expressed.
§ Mr. PriceIs my right hon. Friend satisfied that there is any widespread support for this particular piece of academic moonshine? Is he satisfied that the lumping together of hundreds of thousands of people will do anything more than create empire-building chaos and almost total apathy?
§ Mr. CroslandThat is hardly a very objective account of the situation. There is a great deal of support for the Maud recommendations; similarly there is a great deal of opposition. Views are generally confused and contradictory. But at the end of the day the Government must make up their mind and put intelligent proposals to the House.
§ Sir J. RodgersThe Minister said that he had received 1,000 replies. He now says that he has had 2,000 replies. Which is right?
§ Mr. CroslandBoth figures are entirely accurate. I have had the pleasure of receiving 1,000 replies from local authorities and 1,000 replies from members of the public.