HC Deb 24 October 1984 vol 65 cc673-5
1. Mr. Wareing

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will make a statement on his most recent discussions in respect of his proposals to abolish the Greater London council and metropolitan county councils.

The Secretary of State for the Environment (Mr. Patrick Jenkin)

Many councils and other bodies are discussing the details of abolition with Ministers and officials, but some continue to refuse to take part. They will have only themselves to blame if they do not like what is decided.

Mr. Wareing

While commiserating with the Secretary of State on his retaining his present portfolio, in the light of his recent announcement that he is setting up two inquiries into local government finance, may I ask why he continues to ignore the call from many quarters for the setting up of an independent inquiry into finance and structure? Does he not understand that finance and structure cannot be divorced? Is he so hell bent upon his abolition legislation that he ignores the response that is coming from local authorities and other people?

Mr. Jenkin

I do not believe that any inquiry into the abolition of the metropolitan county councils and the GLC would serve any purpose. It is clear that there is widespread support in the metropolitan areas for the simplification of the structure of local government, and we are confident that it is the correct course to pursue.

Mr. Heddle

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the by-election inspired by Mr. Livingstone and his cohorts in August was an expensive and meaningless sham, that the turnout was ludicrously low; and that, in fact, the abolition of those authorities will return democracy not to Whitehall, as the advertisements would have us believe, but to the directly elected borough councils, which are very responsive to the needs and wishes of the ratepayers?

Mr. Jenkin

I agree with my hon. Friend that those manufactured by-elections were an expensive stunt which failed. I also agree with my hon. Friend that the GLC's entire propanganda campaign is founded upon a falsehood, in that it does not pay any attention to the 32 London boroughs and the City of London, which will inherit the vast majority of services which will be devolved from it.

Mr. Simon Hughes

Does the Secretary of State accept that whereas there may be some support, there is certainly widespread anxiety in the metropolitan counties that the details of the abolition proposals have not been thought out or argued through and that there is now a case in those six counties and in London for the Secretary of State to have a separate local inquiry, with the district and county authorities and the public making a contribution for the first time? Until that happens this will be a bigger muddle than any of the other reorganisations that local government has gone through at the behest of the Government and their Conservative predecessors.

Mr. Jenkin

I disagree with the hon. Gentleman. I have already dealt with the subject of the inquiry. The hon. Gentleman is holding in his hand the document in which we set out the details of how the services will be devolved to the lower, democratically elected tier of government. The matter will now be for debate in both this House and the other place when the Bill is introduced, as I hope it will be, early in the next Session of Parliament.

Mr. Douglas Hogg

Does my right hon. Friend accept that in essence his proposals represent an addition in powers to the district and borough councils, which are in closer contact with the electorate than the existing authorities, and that, that being so, his proposals are an extension, not a diminution, of democracy?

Mr. Jenkin

I congratulate my hon. Friend on having secured his freedom. He is right. The district authorities in the metropolitan areas are the real organs of local government. They are closer to the people. There are many more councillors on those authorities who represent the people. This will be an extension of democracy, as my hon. Friend rightly said.

Dr. Cunningham

In personal terms, may I first say how much we welcome the presence of the Secretary of State today and the fact that he escaped the appalling and despicable violence in Brighton? We also welcome the right hon. Member for Mole Valley (Mr. Baker) to his new appointment as Minister for Local Government. I understand the right hon. Gentleman to be something of an expert in doggerel and verse. It may be that he will be able to make something of Government policy.

As for the question from my hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, West Derby (Mr. Wareing), can the Secretary of State honestly confirm what he has just said —that there is overwhelming support in London and the metropolitan counties for the Government's policy? Is not the reverse the truth? Is not the overwhelming burden of evidence against what the Government proposed? Why has the Secretary of State now decided to hold an inquiry into local government finance, when only a few months ago his colleague in the House of Lords was saying that no such inquiry would be of any value?

Mr. Jenkin

The hon. Member for Copeland (Dr. Cunningham) has himself been urging that there should be an inquiry into the system of local government finance. That being so, I hope that he welcomed warmly my announcement at Brighton and a few weeks ago.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his personal remarks. Right hon. and hon. Members on the Government Benches very much appreciate the way in which so many members of the Labour party have been round in their condemnation of the appalling act of terrorism at Brighton.

I said that there was widespread support for the Government's proposals, especially among those who follow local government affairs. Of course, popular opinion has been fed with a tissue of lies at ratepayers' expense by a propaganda campaign spread across hoardings and newspapers in London and in our metropolitan counties. Perhaps it is not surprising that some people have been a bit misled.

2. Mr. Pike

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he proposes to introduce in the next Session of Parliament any changes in the structure of local government in the non-metropolitan counties in England.

The Minister for Local Government (Mr. Kenneth Baker)

No.

Mr. Pike

Does the Minister recognise that ever since his Government were elected their actions have severely, restricted the freedoms of local government? Is it not time that more power was given back to local government? Would it not be appropriate in such a review to introduce organic change and allow certain services to be given back to borough councils, which are closer to the people whom they represent? I have in mind, for example, social services, which would be more appropriately tied up with the housing service.

Mr. Baker

The hon. Gentleman has made the point that my right hon. Friend made about the abolition of the metropolitan counties. The Government are very much it favour of the devolution of services to local authorities. As my hon. Friend the Member for Grantham (Mr. Hogg) indicated, that is the thrust of our policy. I appreciate that Burnley used to be a county borough and that it had greater degree of independence in the past, but I think that the effect of the distribution of functions between the upper and lower tiers in the county councils which we an abolishing is that the senior partners will be the London boroughs and the metropolitan districts.