Mr Peter Pike (Burnley, Labour)

You have to rise quickly if you wish to speak in my Committees, Mr. Clifton-Brown.

Mr Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cotswold, Conservative)

I can see that you work very quickly, Mr. Pike. Even at this time of the morning, you are extremely sharp.

Clause 2 is one of the Bill's most important as it sets up the duties and functions of a regional planning body. We made progress last week, in that we learned from the Minister that the recognised bodies are, in the absence of elected regional assemblies, to be the regional chambers. Of the eight regions, three are not yet up and running, but they will be by the spring, in the words of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, the hon. Member for Harrow, East (Mr. McNulty). I hope that I have quoted him correctly; if not, he will no doubt put the record straight. That was one of the most important revelations of our two sittings last week, and it was very welcome. It would be useful to have the Hansard before me, so that I could check the accuracy of my quotation, but I must rely on my memory instead.

I am slightly concerned about the explanatory notes, which make it clear that, in itself, a change of membership of the recognised regional planning body would not render it invalid. What does the Minister understand by that? To take the most extreme example, if the regional planning body were to contract out all its functions, would that in itself render it derecognised? That point needs to be clarified.

Having said that, I must say that the Committee has examined the clause in huge detail and made progress.

We have much to do today, so in order that we may continue to make progress, I shall let the Minister reply.

Mr Tony McNulty (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister; Harrow East, Labour)

The hon. Gentleman is right to say that clause 2 is fundamental to the development of the Bill. Under subsection (2), permission is given to develop subsequent regulations and criteria for membership of the regional planning body, as we discussed last week. The criteria currently envisaged for the membership or establishment of RPBs, against which they will be judged and duly recognised, consist, as outlined in the Green Paper, of whether the RPB and the steering groups that are proposed to manage preparation of the revised strategy are sufficiently representative; whether the RPB will consult a sufficiently broad range of regional stakeholders, including through focus groups or planning forums; whether the RPB will work sufficiently closely with all groups to ensure delivery of the strategy; and whether the RPB will be able to take a sufficiently strategic regional view, addressing difficult regional choices where necessary.

Under clause 2(6), if the membership of the body changes—for example, if someone leaves for whatever reason and someone else joins—there is no need to re-recognise or, indeed, derecognise the body. As I understand it, a simple change of membership is permitted in the spirit of what the RPB should consist of and in the context of the criteria in the Green Paper.

Mr Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (Cotswold, Conservative)

Clause 2(6) states:

''A change in the membership of a body which is not incorporated does not—''

these are the important words—

''(by itself) affect the validity of the recognition of the body.''

In what circumstances does the Minister envisage that a body will be so transformed by a change in membership that he would have to consider derecognising it?

Mr Tony McNulty (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister; Harrow East, Labour)

That would be the case if the transformation of the membership meant that the regional planning body fell outside the criteria that we have laid down, indicatively for now, in the planning Green Paper, which will be developed more substantively by circular or regulation. Those criteria will be clearly laid down. One could envisage cases in which an additional or replacement member substantially transformed the body so that it was no longer representative of the region or the other criteria outlined. The change in membership, and whether it is transformative, will be dealt with in the context of the criteria as laid down. Clearly if the change is simple, involving someone from the same representative body moving to the RPB, that will make no difference to the body's representativeness and ability to carry out its work. It would be foolish if every such straightforward change of membership had to be recognised by the Secretary of State.

Given that I gave the Committee a route map last week of the parts of each clause that will give rise to regulation or other secondary activity, I shall try in each stand part debate to refer back to that to let Members know where there will be subsequent

regulation. With that generosity of spirit in mind, I commend the clause to the Committee.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.