HL Deb 30 June 1994 vol 556 cc876-83

27 Clause 27, page 26, line 33, leave out 'one or more committees' and insert 'a committee'.

28 Clause 28, page 21, line 28, leave out ' one year" and insert 'six moons'.

29 Page 21, line 33, at end insert: '( ) Where he proposes not to approve the scheme as submitted, the Secretary of State shall notify the council concerned, before the end of that six month period, of the modifications which he proposes to make to the scheme, or (as the case may be) that he proposes to reject the scheme. ( ) Before he approves a scheme subject to modifications, or rejects a scheme, the Secretary of State shall have regard to any representation which have been made to him by the council concerned.'.

30 Page 22, line 5, leave out from beginning to end of line 30.

31 After Clause 28, insert the following clause:

Area committees: safeguards: '.—

'. — (1) Where an area committee has been established by a council in accordance with an approved decentralisation scheme—

  1. (a) the council shall not, except with the agreement of the committee, abolish the committee or alter any arrangements in force with respect to the committee which were made in accordance with the scheme as originally approved or which have subsequently been agreed with the committee. and
  2. (b) nothing in section 101(4) of the 1972 Act (power of local authority to exercise functions otherwise discharged by committee) shall lie takes to authorise the council to exercise any functions which are to be discharged by the committee, except as provided for by the scheme.

(2) Every decentralisation scheme shall include provision, to be given effect to by the standing orders of the council concerned, for the majority required in order for any suspending resolution to be passed to be such majority greater man a simple majority as may be specified by the scheme.

(3) In subsection (2) "suspending resolution", in relation to a decentralisation scheme, means a resolution to suspend any of the arrangements to force with respect to an area committee established in accordance with the scheme.'.

32 After Clause 28, insert the following clause:

Area committees: membership etc '.

'. — (1) This section applies where an area committee has been established by a council in accordance with an approved decentralisation scheme.

(2) The provisions of the 1972 Act with respect to arrangements for the discharge of functions by committees of local authorities and sub-committees, and the appointment of such committees and sub-committees, shall be subject to this section and section (Sub-committees of area committees).

(3) Every person who is a member of the council for an electoral division which falls within the area for which the committee is established shall be entitled to be appointed to the committee at his request.

(4) The committee may appoint additional persons, including members of the council who are not entitled to membership of the committee under subsection (3), as members of the committee.

(5) No other persons shall be eligible for appointment to the committee.

(6) In this section, in relation to an area committee, "co-opted member" means any member appointed by the committee under subsection (4).

(7) Where the Secretary of State has given a direction under section 297 of the Education Act 1993 (power to direct appointment of members of certain committees) which applies to the committee and can only be complied with by the appointment of one or more additional members to the committee, it shall be the duty of the committee to exercise its powers of appointment to secure compliance with the direction.

(8) A co-opted member of an area committee shall not be entitled to vote at any meeting of the committee on any question which falls to be decided at that meeting.

(9) Nothing in subsection (8) shall prevent the appointment of a person, in compliance with a direction under section 297 of the Act of 1993, as a voting member of an area committee.

(10) In the application of section 101 of the 1972 Act (arrangement for discharge of functions by local authorities) in relation to the committee—

  1. (a) subsection (1) shall have effect as if it gave power to the committee, if authorised to do so by the decentralisation scheme, to arrange for the discharge of any of its functions by a local authority other than the authority who made the scheme;
  2. (b) subsection (2) shall have effect with the omission of the words "unless the local authority otherwise direct" and (in the second place where they occur) the words "the local authority or".

(11) Sections 102(3) of the 1972 Act (power to include persons who are not members of the local authority concerned) and 15 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 (political balance on committees) shall not apply in relation to membership of the committee.

(12) The term of office of each of the co-opted members of an area committee shall be fixed by the committee.

(13) Section 102(2) of the 1972 Act (number of members of committee and terms of office) shall not apply in relation to the committee.

(14) In the case of an appointment made in order to comply with a direction under section 297 of the Act of 1993, the committee shall exercise its powers under subsection (12) subject to any provision of the direction relating to terms of office.'.

33 After Clause 28, insert the following clause:

Sub-committees of area committees

'. — (1) In this section "sub-committee" means a sub-committee of an area committee.

(2) The members of a sub-committee shall be appointed by the area committee from among persons who are—

  1. (a) members of the area committee appointed under subsection (3) of section (Area committees: membership etc.); or
  2. (b) entitled to be members of the area committee by virtue of that subsection.

(3) Subject to subsection (10), a sub-committee may appoint additional persons, including persons who are not members of the area committee concerned, as members of the sub-committee.

(4) No other persons shall be eligible for appointment to a sub-committee.

(5) In this section, in relation to a sub-committee, "co-opted member" means any member of the sub-committee appointed under subsection (3).

(6) Where the Secretary of State has given a direction under section 297 of the Education Act 1993 (power to direct appointment of members of certain committees) which applies to a sub-committee, it shall be the duty of the area committee concerned and the sub-committee to secure compliance with the direction.

(7) A co-opted member of a sub-committee shall not be entitled to vote at any meeting of the sub-committee on any question which falls to be decided at that meeting.

(8) Nothing in subsection (7) shall prevent the appointment of a person in compliance with a direction under section 297 of the Act of 1993 as a voting member of a subcommittee.

(9) Sections 102(3) of the 1972 Act (power to include persons who are not members of the local authority concerned) and 15 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 (political balance on committees) shall not apply in relation to membership of a sub-committee.

(10) The number of members of a sub-committee and their terms of office shall be fixed by the area committee concerned.

(11) Section 102(2) of the 1972 Act (number of members of committee and terms of office) shall not apply in relation to the sub-committee.

(12) In the case of an appointment made in order to comply with a direction under section 297 of the Act of 1993, the area committee shall exercise its powers under subsection (10) subject to any provision of the direction relating to terms of office.'.

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 27 to 33 en bloc

The decentralisation provisions in the Bill provide for the setting up of area committees in areas where there is a strong sense of local community wedded to a tradition of local government at a principal authority level. These amendments are technical and take account of concerns expressed in both Houses. In particular, they simplify and curtail the process by which the Secretary of State considers a decentralisation scheme application. They also provide separate clauses to highlight the provisions relating to safeguards, membership of committees and the setting-up of sub-committees.

Your Lordships will have noticed that the new clauses also provide for co-option of additional persons to serve as members of committees and sub-committees, a matter which was mentioned previously by your Lordships. Those co-opted will generally be non-voting members.

Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 27 to 33.—(Lord Rodger of Earlsferry.)

Lord Elis-Thomas

My Lords, I welcome the amendments which, as the noble and learned Lord said, relate to some of the issues that were raised previously by those of us concerned particularly about the Mid Wales decentralisation measures. The concept of the sub-committee of the area committees and the co-option is new. It would be helpful if the noble and learned Lord could give us some indication of what is in his department's mind as regards the kind of people who might be co-opted. Are we in the process of creating new nominated bodies—albeit nominated by local councils in this context? What kind of persons would the department expect to fulfil the role of an appointed member of a sub-committee of an area committee in Mid Wales, for example?

Baroness White

My Lords, can the Minister also explain whether the provisions will include people representing community councils? We discussed that when the Bill was before the House previously.

Lord Prys-Davies

My Lords, perhaps I too may ask a number of questions for clarification. I suggest that Amendment No. 29 may require clarification—not amendment, but clarification. Could the noble and learned Lord confirm whether the six-month period could be extended to enable the council to comment on any material issue which the Secretary of State may raise or whether the entire exercise has to be completed within the period of six months from the date of the submission of the scheme?

If there is no discretion to extend the six-month period—I assume that there is not—does the noble and learned Lord agree that the Secretary of State and his advisers should not be seeking representation from a principal council at the fag end of the period, particularly if the fag end of the period fell in the months of December or July?

Perhaps I may turn to Amendment No. 31. Will the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate be good enough to clarify the connection between subsections (1) (a) and (3)? Both subsections have one thing in common. They both refer to: arrangements in force with respect to the committee". Subsection (1) (a) provides that the arrangements in force cannot be altered except with the agreement of the area committee. However, that seems to be modified by subsection (3) which provides that the arrangements in force can be altered by the principal council after the passing of a suspending resolution.

That being so, it would be helpful if the noble and learned Lord could give an indication of what percentage of the membership of the principal council voting for the suspending resolution will constitute a majority for that purpose. Will that percentage be the same for all principal councils in Wales where there is a delegation scheme or will it vary from council to council depending upon the Secretary of State's discretion?

I turn to the last point which relates to Amendment No. 32. We welcome subsection (4) which was included in response to a valid point made in Committee by my noble friend Lord Williams of Elvel. Can we have a further explanation of subsections (8) and (9)? As I understand it, a co-opted member will have no voting rights unless he is a member appointed under Section 297 of the Education Act 1993. Will the noble and learned Lord confirm that if he is an appointed member under the 1993 Act, he will have a voting power but only in connection with the functions contained in the Education Act 1993? I shall be grateful to have clarification of those points of detail.

Lord Hooson

My Lords, I suppose the safeguards proposed in the amendments are, as the noble Lord, Lord Elis-Thomas, said, to be preferred to the original proposals, but I am still concerned that these proposals for area committees will be the source of great mischief in Wales. I am sorry to say this, but I should have preferred the voluntary system which is proposed for Scotland rather than the area committee set-up proposed in these amendments for Wales.

It seems to me, and perhaps the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate will deal with this point, to be a source of confusion regarding accountability and legal responsibility as between the unitary authority itself and the area committees under this rather rigid system. It would be much better, for example, in the area of Powys, which unfortunately is now inflicted upon us, if the people of Powys themselves could have worked out a voluntary system between Powys and the three areas of Montgomery, Radnorshire and Breconshire. It should have been left to the local people to work it out.

4.15 p.m.

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

My Lords, I shall start with the point raised by the noble Lord, Lord Hooson, since it is the most general one. We touched upon it on a number of occasions at earlier stages of the Bill. The position is, as I emphasised previously, that in some senses the powers given in Clause 28 and the other clauses that follow it are supplementary to the powers for local councils to appoint committees, which already exist under the Local Government Act 1972.

If the people of Powys wish to enter into their own kinds of arrangements—nothing to do with the provisions enshrined in these clauses—and have their own area committees, but area committees without the particular characteristics—I used the word on a previous occasion—of rigidity (the statutory locks on these committees which mean that they cannot be abolished easily), and do not wish to go down that route, but agree among themselves to set up area committees, there is nothing to prevent them from doing so. As we discussed on a previous occasion, in one sense the critical point in the Scottish clause is not that it gives a new power but that it imposes a positive duty upon all councils to examine decentralisation schemes. But the actual powers are powers which already exist in the legislation both in Scotland and in England and Wales.

Here we are dealing with something rather different —where people in Powys, or in other parts of Wales, wish to set up these particular area committees which will then be in position unless the area committees themselves agree to their abolition. That gives them a certain status within the council because they cannot be abolished by a decision of the council. If they wish to go down that route, they will use the mechanism of this scheme, which has the advantage of giving the powers to the local committee, which means that they cannot be abolished, for example. If enough people come forward they will put forward such a proposal, and the Secretary of State will consider it. If in due course it goes through, then this particular form of area committee will come into existence. If they do not wish to do that, and they wish to have their own form of area committee, there is nothing to prevent them from having a form which does not attract these characteristics but just uses the normal committee provisions of local government legislation. There is a great measure of flexibility.

Within the clauses one sees that there is plenty of room for the schemes to be tailored to the requirements of the areas to which they relate. There is no question of this matter being imposed undesirably upon Wales. It is a mechanism which exists for those areas in Wales which wish to take advantage of it.

The noble Lord, Lord Elis-Thomas, rightly drew attention to the matter of co-opted members, which is new. It arose from some of the things said in your Lordships' House and in another place about it being desirable for the area committees to have co-opted members. I remember the telling point made by the noble Lord, Lord Williams of Elvel, about it being desirable, if one had a local area committee dealing with a planning matter, for that committee to be able to co-opt the chairman of the main council's planning committee, thereby getting his advice, views and so on about the matter. That is an example of the kind of person who might be co-opted. But, as your Lordships will see, the terms of subsection (4) are wide. It just says, "additional persons". If it were desired to appoint a member of a community council to bring a particular point of view to the debates of the area committee, it would be possible to do so.

Under subsection (8), a co-opted member of an area committee is not entitled to vote at any meeting of the committee. I am sure that your Lordships will see why that should be the case. However, that provision is subject to subsection (9), which is limited in scope. It refers to the Secretary of State giving a direction under Section 297 of the Education Act 1993. That subsection relates to representations on an education sub-committee, for example, of persons who appoint foundation governors for voluntary schools in the area. That is what Section 297 of the Act refers to. The provision in subsection (8) is, in effect, without prejudice to the Secretary of State being able to appoint a person under the limited provision of Section 297 as a voting member in that connection. It is only a small issue but, that apart, the people co-opted will not have a vote.

I turn to the issues raised by the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies. He mentioned the relationship between subsections (1) and (3) of the new clause in Amendment No. 31. Subsection (1) (a) states that: the council shall not, except with the agreement of the committee, abolish the committee or alter any arrangements in force with respect to the committee which were made in accordance with the scheme as originally approved". That is what gives stability and protection to the area committee. Where the scheme is approved under these arrangements the council shall not, except with the agreement of the committee, alter or abolish it. That provision embraces subsections (2) and (3). Subsection (2) states: Every decentralisation scheme shall include provision, to be given effect to by the standing orders of the council concerned, for the majority required in order for any suspending resolution to be passed". It would be possible for a council to pass a suspending resolution, which would suspend the arrangements in force in respect of a particular matter. We have previously given as an example planning decisions that have been delegated. A particular planning issue might arise which, although prima facie is within the delegated range, raises a strategic issue which is thought to be more appropriate for decision by the whole council. In that situation, it would be possible in advance for a suspending resolution to be passed.

The noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, asked about the majority required for such a suspending resolution. Your Lordships may know that draft guidance on decentralisation has been issued by the Welsh Office. It was circulated to local authorities in January this year. It states, among other things: 'The Secretary of State considers that the majority to be specified in the decentralisation scheme should be different for each committee and should be fixed at such a level that if all the members of the council were to vote on the resolution at least one member of the area committee should vote for it in order to secure the necessary majority". If a full council had 60 members, for example, 20 of whom formed an area committee, the number of votes required to suspend any standing order in respect of the area would be 41. That figure would apply regardless of the number of members present or voting on the resolution. The point of that is to ensure that there is no suspension of the order unless at least one person on the area committee supports it. It would not be appropriate to go beyond that because it is desired to keep the flexibility for the various proposals, which will depend on the areas concerned.

The noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, asked about the situation in which the Secretary of State proposes to modify a scheme. The amendments reduce the time which the Secretary of State may take to consider such a scheme. I believe that your Lordships will consider it desirable that the matter should be concluded as; quickly as possible. Nonetheless, I recognised that if it were left too late there might be a danger that no proper consultation could take place.

Certainly the Secretary of State would wish to take account of representation which an authority would make during the consultations. It is inconceivable that the Secretary of State would proceed with proposals for a modification without first having had a form of consultation on the proposals and without having given sufficient time for representations to be submitted. For that reason, it is unlikely that the Secretary of State will seek formal views on a proposal to modify before Christmas, say, and in that situation offer only one month in which views must be submitted. If time were short, it might be possible for him to reject an application but making it perfectly clear that he was inviting the authority to submit revised proposals, for which there is machinery in the Bill.

I hope that I have reassured your Lordships as regards the points that were raised.

Lord Geraint

My Lords, after listening to the reply of the noble and learned Lord the Lord Advocate, I still believe that a two-tier system will operate in some of the counties in Wales, especially as regards planning. I am worried by what the Minister said about planning. It is a major problem in Wales. If both the local authority and the area committee discuss planning matters more problems may be created. I believe that the matter should be left entirely to one authority.

Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

My Lords, we have discussed the matter on a number of occasions. The Government believe that the ability to set up area committees may well be welcome, in particular as regards certain aspects of local planning in various parts of Wales.

On Question, Motion agreed to.