Mr Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cotswold, Conservative)

I beg to move amendment No. 42, in

clause 15, page 6, line 24, leave out from beginning to end of line 26 and add,

'to such guidance as the Secretary of State may by regulations specify for the purposes of this provision, whether or not issued by him.'.

The amendment provides a good opportunity to probe the Minister's intention in relation to guidance and regulations. On the whole, the purist in me says that wherever possible legislation should be made by primary legislation, not by guidance or regulations and certainly not by directions, as we will see later in the Bill. More than half of all the legislation last year went through in the form of secondary legislation. There were more than 4,000 items, many of them completely undebated. A small part went through by negative procedure under a statutory instrument and received only cursory scrutiny. We, therefore, need to probe the Minister every time a Bill refers to regulations.

The Minister has been very courteous in producing draft regulations for the Bill in plenty of time for the Committee to debate them, unlike his colleague on the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Bill. However, I do not believe that we have had sight of any draft regulations on this clause. Perhaps the Under-Secretary can give us an idea of what he expects might be in such regulations. It will not have escaped the notice of the Committee that there is a difference between subsections (a) and (b). Whereas subsection (a) refers to

''such guidance as the Secretary of State may issue'',

subsection (b) refers to

''such other guidance as the Secretary of State may by regulations specify for the purposes of this provision.''

There is a difference. Under one subsection the Secretary of State can issue guidance such as he sees fit, in the other it has to be by regulations which presumably must go through this House and receive some scrutiny.

I understand from my hon. Friend the Member for Runnymede and Weybridge that in the Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill the Minister accepted and made directions subject to scrutiny, in other words subject to regulations. It would be useful to probe the Government's consistency as to how they intend to draw up the guidance and whether it is by regulations. I do not quite see why the entire paragraph should not be by regulations but it would be interesting to know the Under-Secretary's thinking on this matter.

Mr Christopher Leslie (Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office; Shipley, Labour)

The amendment would significantly change the clause, which first requires local authorities to have regard to any guidance issued by the Secretary of State. We are thinking of using that power to give clear and simple guidance on prudent investment practice. Secondly, it requires authorities to have regard to guidance issued by other bodies and specified in regulations under the clause. Regulation 18 of the draft regulations indicates that we intend to specify the treasury management code published by CIPFA, which is already widely adopted by local authorities.

Unfortunately, the amendment would require all guidance to be specified in regulations, including any issued by the Secretary of State. That would be an extremely unusual approach. Guidance is one thing, but it is not the same as a direction. It simply requires authorities to have regard to a particular policy. To have that aspect always enshrined formally in regulations would be excessive. The Housing Act 1996, which was brought in by the previous Administration, contained powers to issue guidance by regulation. This is not abnormal. I hope that, in those circumstances, the hon. Gentleman will reconsider and withdraw the amendment.

Mr Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cotswold, Conservative)

The Minister's explanation is helpful. I seek one further assurance before urging my colleagues to ask the Committee for its approval to withdraw the amendment.

With regard to the guidance, particularly the CIPFA code on prudential borrowing, will the Minister confirm that it would be the normal practice of the Department, when changing the guidance, to consult widely, particularly with CIPFA and the other main bodies involved?

Mr Christopher Leslie (Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office; Shipley, Labour)

Certainly, in the normal course of our business we are keen to consult when we make changes to guidance. With regard to the specific provisions to which I have already referred, including the code produced by CIPFA, it would be slightly awkward for us to consult on changes that CIPFA proposed to make to its own code. However, I accept the spirit of

consultation that the hon. Gentleman seeks, and we shall endeavour to do that as best we can.

Mr Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cotswold, Conservative)

After that short debate, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause 15 ordered to stand part of the Bill.