HC Deb 29 October 1990 vol 178 cc839-41

Lords amendment: No. 209, to insert the following new clause—

("—(1) The Secretary of State may, for the purposes of the transition to the duties imposed by section 86 above on local authorities and educational bodies, by regulations, make provision—

  1. (a) modifying that section. or
  2. (b) modifying Part I of the Local Government Act 1988 (competition rules for functional work or works contracts).

(2) Regulations under this section may make different provision for different descriptions of authorities, different areas or other different circumstances or cases.

(3) In this section—

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House doth agree with the Lords in the said amendment.—[Mr. Trippier.]

Madam Deputy Speaker

With this we may also discuss amendments (a) and (b) to the Lords amendment, and Lords amendment No. 305.

Ms. Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent, North)

Opposition Members are very concerned about the continuing problem relating to the code of practice applying to litter. It was raised early in our consideration of the Bill; it was also raised with me, at a conference that I attended on 24 September—a joint conference involving both the Association of Direct Labour Organisations and the Association of Metropolitan Authorities.

The problem appears to have resulted from the Local Government Act 1988, which provides for compulsory competitive tendering. That Act cuts right across this Bill. It seems clear to local authorities that now have the responsibility of introducing CCT that it will be almost impossible for them to build it on to the code of practice—which, I understand, has not yet been finally agreed, although it has already been through at least seven drafts.

If the Government are talking about the importance of environmental protection, and about the need for it to cut across all local authority services, they should recognise the problem that they have created for themselves. The Secretary of State has powers to make changes to clause 86, which applies the code of practice to local authorities. What worries us is what will happen when a council has already tendered, under CCT, and a contract—whether in-house or outside—has already been properly agreed within the terms of the 1988 Act.

More important, what about the transitional arrangements between the existing tender and the new code? It is fair to say that the Government have recognised the problem, and, in the other place, have gone some way towards taking it on board. Nevertheless, there could well be a difference in the Government's interpretation of the Act: contracts already won in-house could be treated differently from those won by outside contractors.

It matters to us that local authorities should be able to enforce the code of practice on litter, when it is finally agreed, in a uniform way throughout the country, and that we should not have different standards of litter as a result of the lack of timetabling in respect of the implementation of CCT. It is likely that the litter duties, which were based on the code of practice that was introduced by the Tidy Britain Group, have been dreamt up without any serious consideration of how they cut across the rolling programme of CCT for street cleansing.

We welcome the changed deadlines that have already been introduced, which mean that CCT will be delayed, in one case, until 1 August and in other cases, until 1 January 1992. We accept that some progress has been made, but we want an assurance from the Minister that authorities will not be required again to undertake tendering processes that they have already gone through in the current round. We want to know also that the two kinds of contract—in-house and outside—are being dealt with in the same way. How do the Government intend to resolve the enormous problems to which they have already admitted in their deliberations?

We want certain assurances: first, that the introduction of the code will not lead to waste and dislocation caused by a further round of tendering for any authority; secondly, that authorities' problems with in-house and outside services will be considered as a whole; thirdly, that there will be no different treatment between the two types of services; fourthly, that, as a result, the Government will review their interpretation of section 7(8) of the 1988 Act; and, fifthly, that discussions with local authority associations will proceed as soon as possible. Local authority associations in particular have expressed concern about the situation in which they now find themselves.

Mr. Heathcoat-Amory

This new clause gives the Secretary of State power to make transitional provisions to protect the position of authorities that already assigned contracts for the provision of the relevant services under the competitive tendering legislation before the new litter code was published. The hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Ms. Walley) has acknowledged that we have already moved a number of deadlines to accommodate the position of those authorities which might otherwise have had insufficient time to take account of the new litter standards.

We recognise that contracts are likely to have to be modified to take account of the standards of litter clearance that will be required by the code. The dates that we have moved are the rounds of competition which were due to be completed by 1 January and 1 August next year. They have been moved back to 1 August 1991 and 1 January respectively. It will be possible for authorities to take full account of the code when they draw up their specifications.

Where contracts had already been let before the code was promulgated, the new clause will give the Secretary of State power to make the necessary transitional arrangements. They will provide for any additional work which may be necessary to be taken on board. They will also protect the position of authorities until such time as that can be done. They will cover cases in which contracts have been let to the private sector and also those in which work has been assigned to an authority's own direct service organisation.

I can promise the hon. Lady that we will consult local authority associations on the details of how to reconcile the needs of competitive tendering with the parallel need to implement the new litter standards as soon as possible. I recognise that that is an issue. I know also that compulsory competitive tendering has brought significant benefits not just to local community charge payers but to authorities. It has required them to define duties and has ensured that the work is tested in the market place to ensure value for money. We do not wish to relinquish those gains.

11.30 pm

I am sure that the hon. Lady will also recognise the need to implement the new litter code as widely and consistently as possible. I am sure that she would not like the standards to be pepper-potted about the country any more than is absolutely necessary, and that she will therefore join me in hoping that we can work out the details of implementing the new litter duties as soon as possible. These have not yet been finalised, but I undertake to consult the local authority associations on the proposals when they are available.

Question put and agreed to.

Subsequent Lords amendments agreed to.

Further consideration adjourned.—[Mr. Kirkhope.]

To be further considered tomorrow.