§ 8.37 p.m.
§ House again in Committee.
§ Clause 23 [Power of Secretary of State to require referendum]:
§
Lord Whitt moved Amendments Nos. 221 and 222:
Page 12. line 35, at end insert ("for or in connection with").
Page 12, line 37, leave out ("require") and insert ("direct").
§ On Question, amendments agreed to.
§ [Amendment No. 223 not moved.]
§
Lord Whitty moved Amendments Nos. 224 to 234:
Page 12, line 38, leave out from ("arrangements" ) to end of line 39 and insert ("involving an executive which takes a particular form permitted by or under section 10.").
Page 12, line 41, leave out (", in particular,").
Page 12, line 41, leave out ("as to").
Page 12, line 42, at beginning insert ("as to").
Page 12, line 43, at beginning insert ("as to").
Page 12, line 43, leave out ("to") and insert ("which may, may not or must").
Page 12, line 43, after ("before") insert ("or in connection with").
Page 13, line 1, at beginning insert ("as to").
Page 13, line 1, leave out ("to") and insert ("which may, may not or must").
Page 13, line 1, at end insert (", and
( ) for or in connection with enabling the Secretary of State, in the event of any failure by a local, authority to take any action permitted or required by virtue of the regulations, to take that action").
Page 13, line 2, leave out subsections (3) and (4) and insert—
("(3) The provision which may be made by virtue of subsection (2) includes provision which applies or reproduces (with or without modifications) any provisions of section 18, 19, 20 or (Operation of alternative arrangements.).
(4) Nothing in subsection (2) or (3) affects the generality of the power under subsection (1).").
§ On Question, amendments agreed to.
§ [Amendment No. 235 not moved.]
§ On Question, Whether Clause 23, as amended, shall stand part of the Bill?
§ Lord Dixon-SmithI must confess that I find Clause 23 immensely depressing and I regret deeply that I should have to see such a clause in any legislation. Furthermore, I regret that the Government have felt it desirable to bring forward the clause.
Clause 23 provides that:
The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision enabling him, in such circumstances as may be prescribed in the regulations—for which he is responsible—to require a local authority to hold a referendum on whet her they should operate executive arrangements",169 and so forth. What an amazing vote of confidence in his own proposals that the Secretary of States feels that he must have regulatory power to force local authorities to do what is required here. I am sorry; I find that very depressing.When one looks at the draft regulations, one finds that it appears to the Secretary of State that the authority has not drawn up this or that, or that it has drawn up this without having done that, or that the authority's proposals do not comply with this or that. And it goes on and on. It does not quite say at the end, "and in such other circumstances as the Secretary of State thinks are appropriate", but it jolly nearly comes to that. That seems to be something which I should find slightly encouraging because it indicates that the Secretary of State has no confidence in his own proposals and therefore he does not believe that people will go through willingly with what is proposed in the legislation. Therefore, he needs to reserve power to force them to do so.
That may be the way of new Labour. If it is, in due time they will pay for that arrogance. I do not believe that that is the proper way for this country to go forward; still less do I believe that it is a proper way to treat democratically elected authorities which might be supposed to have a will of their own. For that reason it seemed to me that it would be preferable that Clause 23 be excised from the Bill. It is with that in mind that I tabled the Motion that Clause 23 should not stand part of the Bill. I beg to move.
§ Lord WhittyI feel that the noble Lord is reading rather more into the intentions behind this clause than his speech would suggest. We have already made a draft of the regulations, which set out what an authority must do in that respect. I see that the noble Lord has already marked the sentence. Therefore, he will know that all those circumstances relate to a situation where a local authority either does not comply with the legislation or guidance in drawing up its proposals or, alternatively, it does not have regard to the wishes of local people following a period of consultation in line with that guidance and legislation; in other words, a local authority will have decided either to opt out entirely from the word go or to ignore the will of the people once it has been sought.
We do not believe that there will be many such situations. However, we believe that the power is necessary to deal with isolated cases of abuse and to avoid the necessity in those circumstances of having to resort to the courts where an authority does not comply with the legislation. There is nothing more sinister than that behind the clause. Its purpose is to deal with situations of abuse or possibly inertia on the part of local authorities when moving to executive arrangements, which is the whole objective of the legislation. It is simply a safeguard to ensure that councils comply with the legislation and progress to new constitutions at a reasonable pace. It does not give us, nor would we wish to have, powers arbitrarily to require local authorities to hold referendums or to intervene in other circumstances. I commend the clause to the Committee.
§ Lord Dixon-SmithIt is only because I have stood opposite the Minister for so long and begin to have an element of faith in his words that I feel inclined not to pursue the matter further. However, I shall need to 170 study exactly what he said before I determine absolutely not to deal with the issue at some point further down the line. I am grateful to him for his reply, which certainly helps. In the meantime, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
§ Clause 23, as amended, agreed to.
§
Lord Whitty moved Amendment No. 236:
After Clause 23, insert the following new clause—