HC Deb 04 April 2000 vol 347 cc791-3
1. Mr. Tony McWalter (Hemel Hempstead)

What representations he has received opposing his plans to divide councillors into those with an executive function and those with a scrutiny function; and if he will make a statement. [116141]

The Minister for Local Government and the Regions (Ms Hilary Armstrong)

We have received many representations both supporting and opposing our proposals for new constitutions for councils. The evidence is that local people want directly elected mayors to lead their communities.

Mr. McWalter

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer. Will she confirm that it is not her intention to have a single monolithic model imposed on all councils and, in particular, that, as long as councils achieve the aim of greater transparency in their dealings, the Government agree that that is an effective way to run local councils?

Ms Armstrong

My hon. Friend is right. The reforms in the Local Government Bill will open up many opportunities for councils to run themselves in the way that is most appropriate to their local area, after consultation with local people. Greater efficiency, transparency and accountability are at the heart of the Bill—as the Joint Committee recognised when it considered the Bill in draft. The traditional committee system does not meet that aim; that is why we want to move forward.

Mr. Peter Viggers (Gosport)

Is the Minister old enough to remember the words of the old Erasmic shaving soap advertisement? Does she think that £58,500 a year for three days work a week on Cardiff council is a bit too much, not enough or about right?

Ms Armstrong

I am concerned that we should have a local government system that local people feel is really effective and is working for and with them. I do not know about shaving soaps—I am sorry to disappoint the hon. Gentleman but the matter is not one that I spend much time worrying about. However, I do spend time trying to ensure that local government is open, accountable and working with local people.

Mr. Llew Smith (Blaenau Gwent)

Will the Minister explain how, on the one hand, the Government are in favour of devolution of power, but, on the other, in relation to local authorities, they seem to be concentrating on the centralisation of power in the hands either of a mayor or a leader and a cabinet? Does the Minister accept that, if a councillor does not fit into one of those categories, his or her role will be minimal? Will she accept the amendment from the other place that gives local authorities the option of maintaining the status quo?

Ms Armstrong

There is a slight problem with the amendments from the other place; three or four were accepted—all are contradictory. The status quo does not allow for scrutiny. It does not allow local people to find out what is really happening in their council; what the effect of any of its decisions would be on the ground; and how they would be implemented. The present system was right for 150 years ago, when few people had the franchise and were allowed to sit on councils. That system does not meet the needs of modern society or the demand from local people to have a better look at what is happening in their council and at the consequences of its decisions.

Mr. Nigel Waterson (Eastbourne)

As the Labour leader of Cardiff receives £58,500 a year, as we have heard, and leaders of London boroughs are likely to receive £45,000, is there not a real danger of creating two classes of councillor? After the clear-cut vote in the Lords recently, will the Minister confirm whether the Government intend to remove the freedom of local councils to choose their own structures? Will she listen to the voices of people such as her hon. Friends, the Local Government Association and councillors of all parties, including the Labour campaign for open local government—with 1,000-plus supporters, of whom 500 are councillors from 80-plus councils? Is it not high time that she and her friends gave up this control-freakery?

Ms Armstrong

We are trying to emerge from an era when only one system was possible. At present, only the committee system is legal. The Bill offers a wide framework; those councils that have begun preparations to introduce it are coming up with widely different forms of governance. They are doing so after consultation with local people. Of course, it is important that I consider and scrutinise what the Lords have said. I am discussing matters with the LGA; I met the LGA again last week. However, the Government have the right to ensure that the basic integrity of the Bill is preserved; we shall make sure that scrutiny—far from having a second-tier, less important role—is properly recognised as essential to good local government.