Clause 44
Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill
6:54 pm
Phil Woolas (Minister of State (Local Government & Community Cohesion), Department for Communities and Local Government; Oldham East and Saddleworth, Labour)
The passion of the hon. Gentleman’s campaign against directly elected executives continues to grow. I will defend the Government’s proposals and the schemes of my colleagues in Stockton and elsewhere.
In tabling the amendment, I think that the hon. Gentleman is trying to provide greater stability for the council that has adopted the directly elected executive model so that, if the elected leader ceases to hold office during the four years, for whatever reason, there can be stability and the remainder of the executive can carry on. The Government are keen to support stability in councils so, on the face of it, it would seem that I should accept the hon. Gentleman’s amendment. However, I have to resist it. I shall explain why
The Committee knows that the Government’s view is that directly elected forms of executive arrangements provide the strongest and most visible leadership and are therefore the most accountable. As with a mayor, a directly elected executive allows people to understand who is responsible for taking difficult decisions—in other words, they know where the buck stops. People would elect a directly elected executive on the basis of the manifesto that has been produced and, of course, they can hold that executive to account. However, under that system they expressly elect a leader and members of the executive. When they cast their vote they are choosing the person—the executive leader—whom they want to be in charge of delivering a manifesto and policies with the help of the executive members on his or her slate, if I can use that word.
The executive powers of the council rest in the office of the leader in those circumstances as in the other two options, and it is therefore essential that if that person ceases to hold office, the electorate are able to choose whom they wish to replace that leader. Of course, that would result in a by-election, and I suspect that it is part of the hon. Gentleman’s concerns about this model. However, I think that that is right. If the electorate have chosen an executive with a leader, and that leader resigns or leaves office for some reason, they should be able to choose a successor. That is a good thing and it will help to achieve the improvement of local democracy that we all say we want.
The provisions relating to the filling of casual vacancies occurring in the office of the elected mayor are contained in regulations; they were not included in the 2000 Act. Broadly, those regulations state that an election to fill the vacancy shall be held within 35 working days of the date that the office was declared vacant. Until such an election has taken place and the vacancy has been filled, the office is filled by the deputy mayor. Therefore, it would be inconsistent to include in the Bill the arrangements for such by-elections; to remain consistent, such provisions should be contained in regulations in order.
I would like to reassure the Committee, and take the opportunity to place on record, that we intend to provide for the filling of vacancies in the office of the leader of the directly elected executive in exactly the same way that is used for the office of mayor. Where there is a vacancy for the office of leader of an elected executive, an election for a new executive would have to take place within 35 days of the date that the office was declared vacant. That would be an election for a new leader and a slate of candidates. Until such an election had taken place and the new executive had taken office, we would intend to provide for the old executive, led by the deputy leader, to continue. Requiring the election of a new leader and executive within 35 days provides the stability required in an authority and, crucially, the transparency and accountability that I hope we all want to achieve. That is my explanation of how to make a workable proposal even more workable.