HL Deb 11 May 2004 vol 661 cc155-60

1. Before Clause 1, insert the following new Clause—

"Application of Part 1

Part 1 shall apply only if an elected assembly for the region has been established."

The Commons disagree to this amendment for the following reason—

1A Because it is not appropriate to restrict the application of a regional spatial strategy only to regions which have elected assemblies.

The Lords insist on their Amendment No. 1 to which the Commons have disagreed. for the following reason—

1B Because responsibility for drawing up regional spatial strategies should lie with the elected representatives of the communities affected.

The Commons insist on their disagreement to Lords Amendment No. 1 but propose the following amendment to the Bill in lieu thereof—

1C Page 2, line 7, at end insert— '(2A) The Secretary of State must not give a direction under subsection (1) in relation to a body unless not less than 60% of the persons who are members of the body fall within subsection (2B). (2B) A person falls within this subsection if he is a member of any of the following councils or authorities and any part of the area of the council or authority (as the case may be) falls within the region to which the direction (if given) will relate—

  1. (a) a district council;
  2. (b) a county council;
  3. (c) a metropolitan district council;
  4. (d) a National Park authority;
  5. (e) the Broads authority.'

Lord Rooker

My Lords, I beg to move that the House do not insist on its Amendment No. 1, in respect of which the Commons have insisted on their disagreement, but do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 1C in lieu thereof.

As the House knows, or is about to find out, Amendment No. 1 would end any system of regional planning where there was not an elected regional assembly. I have set out the Government's stall on the importance of regional planning several times, but let me do so again briefly.

We need a system for strategic planning that is based around areas that are interdependent on the ground, not one constrained by administrative boundaries. Many strategic planning issues cut across county boundaries and are best dealt with at regional or sub-regional level. I know that here and in the other place concerns have been expressed about accountability, which I understand and appreciate. We have reflected on a practical way to respond to these concerns. I hope that the democratic guarantee offered by Amendment No. 1C that has arrived from the other place—the elected House—will commend itself to this House.

The regional planning process needs to be driven forward by bodies able to represent the region and take a strategic view. Regional chambers are best placed to fulfil that role. Chambers are, of course, not directly elected, but they are representative of local authorities and the wider stakeholders in the region. Local authority members represent their local authority on the regional planning board.

Members from other stakeholder groups, such as business or the voluntary sector, will equally speak up for the interests that they represent. Where elected regional assemblies are established, it is right that they should take over responsibility for regional planning, but we do not think we should conflate this with reforming the planning system: that reform needs to happen now.

Of course, we need the safeguard of democratic accountability. That safeguard needs to be the best one possible, consistent with our current governance arrangements.

Local authorities speak for their communities—that is what they are elected to do. This Bill, along with the regulations and guidance, guarantees that theirs will be the loudest voice in regional planning.

Local authorities are in the majority on regional chambers which will be the regional planning bodies. Where there is a consensus there, the local authority view will prevail in the regional planning body's work.

However, I recognise the concerns expressed. Therefore, Amendment No. 1C highlights the leading role of local authorities and provides a statutory guarantee for the future. The Secretary of State will not be able to recognise a body as a regional planning body unless at least 60 per cent of its members are drawn from county councils, unitary authorities, district councils, national parks authorities or the Broads authority. I hope that the House will be content with Amendment No. 1C. I beg to move.

Moved, That the House do not insist on its Amendment No. 1, in respect of which the Commons have insisted on their disagreement, but do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 1C in lieu thereof.—(Lord Rooker.)

Baroness Hamwee rose to move Amendment No. 1D, as an amendment to the Motion that this House do not insist on its Amendment No. 1, in respect of which the Commons have insisted on their disagreement, but do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 1C in lieu thereof, leave out from "House" to end and insert "do insist on its Amendment No. 1, and do disagree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 1C in lieu thereof".

The noble Baroness said: My Lords, the substantive issue does not seem to have held the attention of the House as well as the procedural one that preceded it, and I am grateful to noble Lords who have remained.

When your Lordships asked the Commons to think again on this issue, the reason was because responsibility for drawing up the regional spatial strategy should lie with elected representatives of the communities affected.

The amendment which the Government are asking your Lordships to consider today in lieu of what we came to call the sunrise clause does not begin to be in lieu of the clause which inserted the proper democratic element into this part of the Bill. Technically, it may be in lieu, but in no other way.

The Minister in another place recognised the issues of democracy which are at stake, as has the Minister today. However, this amendment does not deal with the issue. I cannot believe that the Government really believe that indirect, partial election to what will be an appointed body is a proper substitute. What is proposed is a minimum of 60 per cent membership drawn from local authorities—including the districts, which are not currently responsible for structure plans—as against draft regulations, which have been in place throughout this House's consideration of the Bill and provide a 30 per cent minimum from the business sector. In other words, at most there will be a 10 per cent shift in membership, but it will not address the point about a direct, democratic connection.

The Minister in another place said: Local authority members represent their local authority on the regional planning body".—[Official Report, Commons, 29/4/04; col. 1040]

That refers to the individual representatives' own authority not, as we would see it, having elected representatives elected with the duty of representing their whole region. It is not possible to have local authorities representing all local authority areas. It goes against the grain; if you stood for election to represent your local patch, that would be your priority, and rightly so. I do not want to repeat at too great length arguments I have made before, but indirect election is not adequate for this purpose.

The Minister also talked of other stakeholder group members speaking for the interests they represent. But we are all wedded to democracy. Instead of appointed business representatives having votes, democratically elected government means representing everyone. I am sure that, more than anybody in this House, when the Minister was elected he felt that he represented all his constituents, whether or not they voted for him. I fear that what the Government propose is divisive.

We talked before about accountability meaning and engendering faith in the process—the whole issue of trust. I am talking about faith in politics, not just the planning process. The Government say that the amendment would destroy regional planning, but if they came forward with a better democratic input, we would not again have found ourselves considering whether convenience should be placed ahead of democracy.

The Liberal Democrat and Conservative Benches approached the matter from bases which were, in part, different. I enjoyed the Hansard reference in another place to the fact that the Conservative Party is the parent of "regional panning". That may not have been what the Minister intended to say, but he came rather close to the truth.

The Conservatives have spoken very powerfully of the connection between citizens, elected government and the role of the counties in structure plans and strategic planning. I hope that they will support the amendment and translate what they have said into legislative terms. I beg to move.

Moved, as an amendment to the Motion that this House do not insist on its Amendment No. 1, in respect of which the Commons have insisted on their disagreement, but do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 1C in lieu thereof, leave out from "House" to end and insert "do insist on its Amendment No. 1, and do disagree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 1C in lieu thereof". —(Baroness Hamwee.)

Lord Hanningfield

My Lords, as my noble friend Lord Strathclyde said a little while ago, this is an extraordinary situation. Some of us have been debating this for a long while and have had many opportunities to talk over the issues. The Bill has suddenly hit the headlines because of the events of the past few days.

I shall speak at greater length to another amendment later on, but on this amendment, we have supported regional spatial strategies or regional spatial strategy boards in the past only if they are directly elected regional assemblies. I did not know about the reference to "panning assemblies" rather than "planning assemblies". That is an interesting new phrase. One feels that one has been "panning across" the whole of this legislation for some time.

We have always made it clear that we are opposed to directly elected regional assemblies. We are hoping for "no" votes in the three referenda later in the year. However, we have felt—I echo the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee—that a democratic element should very much be part of the planning process. I hope that the amendment to which I shall later speak at greater length will cover that issue rather more.

On this amendment, we have been discussing this legislation for a long while—some 18 months. Although we do not agree with many of the Government's views in the Bill—I have said several times that it needs a lot of work to make it really deliver the Government's objectives—we shall not be supporting the amendment of the noble Broness, Lady Hamwee, this afternoon.

Lord Rooker

My Lords, I do not accept the amendment.

Baroness Hamwee

My Lords, we have not quite hit the headlines, but we shall test the opinion of the House.

3.42 p.m.

On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. ID) shall be agreed to?

Their Lordships divided: Contents, 44; Not-Contents, 141.

Division No. 1
CONTENTS
Addington, L. MarandKellie, E.[Teller]
Bradshaw, L. Nicholson of Winterbourne, B.
Clement-Jones, L. Northover, B.
Dahrendorf, L. Palmer, L.
Dholakia, L. Phillips of Sudbury, L.
Ezra, L. Razzall, L.
Fearn, L. Redesdale, L.
Fookes, B. Rodgers of Quarry Bank, L.
Goodhart, L. Roper, L. [Teller]
Greaves, L. Russell-Johnston, L.
Hamwee, B. Saltoun of Abernethy, Ly.
Holme of Cheltenham, L. Sandberg, L.
Hooson, L. Sharman, L.
Hussey of North Bradley, L. Sharp of Guildford, B.
Jacobs, L. Shutt of Greetland, L.
Lester of Herne Hill, L. Smith of Clifton, L.
Linklater of Butterstone, B. Thomas of Walliswood, B.
Livsey of Talgarth, L. Thomson of Monifieth, L.
Mackie of Benshie, L. Tope, L.
Maclennan of Rogart, L. Tordoff, L.
McNally, L. Wallace of Saltaire, L.
Maddock. B. Walmsley, B.
NOT-CONTENTS
Acton, L. Boston of Faversham, L.
Ahmed, L. Brooke of Alverthorpe, L.
Allenby of Megiddo, V. Brookeborough, V.
Alli, L. Brookman, L.
Alton of Liverpool, L. Bruce of Donington, L.
Amos, B. (Lord President of the Campbell-Savours, L.
Council) Carter, L.
Andrews, B. Clark of Windermere, L.
Bach, L. Clarke of Hampstead, L.
Barnett, L. Clinton-Davis, L.
Bassam of Brighton, L. Cobbold, L.
Berkeley, L. Corbett of Castle Vale, L.
Bernstein of Craigweil, L. Craig of Radley, L.
Bhatia, L. Crawley, B.
Billingham, B. David, B.
Blackstone, B. Davies of Coity, L.
Blood, B. Davies of Oldham, L. [Teller]
Borrie, L. Desai, L.
Dixon, L. McIntosh of Haringey, L.
Donoughue, L. McIntosh of Hudnall, B.
Dubs, L. MacKenzie of Culkein, L.
Elder, L. Mackenzie of Framwellgate, L.
Emerton, B. Marsh, L.
Evans of Parkside, L. Masham of Ilton, B.
Evans of Temple Guiting, L. Mason of Barnsley, L.
Falconer of Thoroton, L. (Lord Massey of Darwen, B.
Chancellor) Merlyn-Rees, L.
Farrington of Ribbleton, B. Mishcon, L.
Faulkner of Worcester, L. Mitchell, L.
Filkin, L. Morgan, L.
Finlay of Llandaff, B. Morris of Manchester, L.
Fitt, L. Murray of Epping Forest, L.
Fyfe of Fairfield, L. Nicol, B.
Gale, B. Ouseley, L.
Gibson of Market Rasen, B. Parekh, L.
Golding, B. Patel of Blackburn, L.
Goldsmith, L. Pendry, L.
Gordon of Strathblane, L. Peston, L.
Goudie, B. Pitkeathley, B.
Gould of Potternewton, B. Ponsonby of Shulbrede, L.
Graham of Edmonton, L. Prys-Davies, L.
Greenway, L. Radice, L.
Gregson, L. Randall of St. Budeaux, L.
Grenfell, L. Rendell of Babergh, B.
Grocott, L.[Teller] Richard, L.
Hannay of Chiswick, L. Rogan, L.
Harrison, L. Rooker, L.
Haskel, L. Sawyer, L.
Hogg of Cumbernauld, L. Sheldon, L.
Hollis of Heigham, B. Simon, V.
Howells of St. Davids, B. Slim, V
Howie of Troon, L. Slynn of Hadley, L
Hoyle, L.
Hughes of Woodside, L. Stallard, L.
Hunt of Kings Heath, L. Stone of Blackheath, L.
Irvine of Lairg, L. Strabolgi, L.
Janner of Braunstone, L. Symons of Vernham Dean, B.
Jay of Paddington, B. Temple-Morris, L.
Jeger, B. Tenby, V.
Jones, L. Thornton, B.
Jordan, L. Tomlinson, L.
Judd, L. Triesman, L.
King of West Bromwich, L. Turnberg, L.
Kirkhill, L. Walton of Detchant, L.
Laming, L. Warner, L.
Lamont of Lerwick, L. Warnock, B.
Lea of Crondall, L. Warwick of Undercliffe, B.
Lipsey, L. Weatherill, L.
Listowel, E. Whitaker, B.
Lockwood, B. Wilkins, B.
Lofthouse of Pontefract, L. Williamson of Horton, L.
Macdonald of Tradeston, L. Woolmer of Leeds, L.

Resolved in the negative, and amendment disagreed to accordingly.

On Question, Motion agreed to.