Alistair Burt (Shadow Minister (Communities and Local Government), Communities and Local Government; North East Bedfordshire, Conservative)

I beg to move amendment No. 58, in clause 56, page 42, line 3, leave out ‘an eligible’ and insert ‘a’.

Joe Benton (Bootle, Labour)

With this it will be convenient to discuss the following amendments: No. 59, in clause 56, page 42, line 4, leave out subsection (4).

No. 60, in clause 57, page 42, line 11, leave out ‘an eligible’ and insert ‘a’.

No. 61, in clause 57, page 42, line 16, leave out ‘an eligible’ and insert ‘a’.

No. 62, in clause 57, page 42, line 17, leave out ‘an eligible’ and insert ‘a’.

Alistair Burt (Shadow Minister (Communities and Local Government), Communities and Local Government; North East Bedfordshire, Conservative)

I am happy to move these amendments briefly in the name of my hon. Friends. We will have an opportunity to talk more about parishes in our next  sitting, so I shall not rehearse now a number of the issues that I want to raise in relation to them, but shall confine myself to the amendments.

The purpose of the amendment is to widen the scope for the use of the power to promote well-being. Instead of confining the power to eligible councils, which are effectively those that will be designated under the quality parish councils criteria, the amendment would extend the power and give that opportunity to all councils. That is in line with our general approach of being as permissive as possible in relation to the devolved powers.

Although I support that extension, I offer one caveat that bears on what I said about the previous amendment. At the weekend, I had a meeting with all my parish councils. I split them into two groups and I saw about two-thirds of the 54 parish councils in my constituency. We had a good discussion about the Bill and the various powers that it contains, and one of the clearest messages that came out of the meeting was that although people thoroughly enjoyed being part of the parish council, they were concerned that over time, more and more responsibilities were coming their way and they did not know whether they could find the people to do the job.

I will read two short quotes, the first of which is from Cardington parish council, which said to me in a letter dated 8 January:

“Concern was also expressed that at this time it is already difficult to get people willing to volunteer to become Parish Councillors, the volume of consultation documents that are received for comment, and with the Local Authorities being penalised if they do not meet the Target Dates for responses.”

Stevington parish council said:

“The role of the Council appears to be changing and both the Council and the Clerk will inevitably have to take on more duties; we forsee difficulty in encouraging residents to stand for the Parish Council in the future if the role becomes more onerous.”

I received a number of other similar remarks. Those two comments can be taken to represent them all.

The power to promote well-being is incredibly widely drawn. The Local Government Act 2000 enables the local authority to promote well-being where it considers it will

“achieve any one or more of the following objects—

“(a) the promotion or improvement of the economic well-being of their area,

(b) the promotion or improvement of the social well-being of their area, and

(c) the promotion or improvement of the environmental well-being of their area.”

The various powers that are available to a council that is granted such a power include the power to

“(a) incur expenditure,

(b) give financial assistance to any person,

(c) enter into arrangements or agreements with any person”

and so on.

I hope that the Under-Secretary can briefly give a sense of how she expects the powers to be used by parish councils and why she feels they should be limited by qualifying criteria. Will she also bear in mind that because the powers will exist, and people will seek them, there is a danger that parish councils are being given rather too much to do? Their original purpose is changing and it is difficult to get the right  sense because we are caught in a trap. Many parish councils want greater responsibility, but will the extension of powers and more responsibility encourage anyone new to come on board and share the burden with the small group of people who at present give a huge amount of time to local affairs? We had an interesting discussion on the matter with the parish councils and, by and large, the consensus was that they did not think they would encourage new people.

I was disappointed, because members of the Committee are involved in the process of government and it matters a lot to us. I am interested in the Under-Secretary’s thinking on the promotion of well-being. How many councils does she think will take up such a provision? Is she keen for it to be permissive so that if a council wants to take a chance, will it be able to do so rather than fulfilling the criteria of being an eligible council and going down the quality parish council route?

Will the Under-Secretary give us her view, to which we can return when we discuss other provisions relating to parish councils? The growing bureaucratisation of parish councils is not helping the process of getting more people informally involved. They fear that their involvement is no longer informal but getting more serious. That might not encourage people to engage with local matters in the way that we would like them to.

Angela Smith (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Communities and Local Government; Basildon, Labour)

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his comments. He shared with us some of the dilemmas of this issue, which we will continue to address in the Committee. I will say something about the reason for this clause being in the Bill and answer his questions in that context.

The Bill takes forward many of the White Paper’s commitments to empower local government. We want to extend that philosophy to parish councils by giving local people much more freedom in respect of well-being in their own area. Parish councils already have a long list of specific activities and powers and an additional power under section 137 of the Local GovernmentAct 1972 to undertake actions that will bring direct benefit. That power is limited at present, not least because there is a ceiling on the amount of money per head that can be spent by a parish on specific objectives. It is currently £5.54 per annum per person.

Clause 56 will release some parish councils from those constraints and give them additional powers to enable them to promote social, economic and environmental well- being in their areas. Hon. Members will be aware that district councils have that power under the Local Government Act 2000 and they must have regard to their own community strategies in exercising that power. We did not want to place an additional burden on parish councils and require them to develop their own community strategies too. To avoid duplication of bureaucratisation, the Bill says that they must have regard to those strategies prepared by a higher-tier authority. We will not require the parish councils to get into additional bureaucracy themselves. Many parishes anyway produce their own local plans and local authorities are increasingly having regard to local parish plans.

As the hon. Gentleman said, the power of well-being is potentially a very broad power and we do not seek to constrain it by placing statutory limits on eligible parishes’ expenditure, but it would be prudent to have some safeguards in place; the problem is how many there should be. Clearly, not every parish council would have the right to the power of well-being because the size of parish councils varies enormously and so does the work they do, their ambitions and, indeed, their competence.

We want to ensure that those who want to use the new power have the capacity and the competencies to do so and that is where the eligibility criteria come in. The White Paper said that the criteria would be based on the non-statutory quality parish scheme, which provides a good starting point for thinking about the issues. However, I cannot give an assurance that those criteria are automatically sufficient for what we are seeking to do. As hon. Members may be aware, in the quality parish councils scheme, a parish council must be able to demonstrate that it is representative of, and actively engages with, all parts of the community, providing vision, identity and a sense of belonging. It must also demonstrate that it is effectively and properly managed, and has the ability and capacity to take on the enhanced role and responsibility that quality status is likely to bring.

That is a good starting point for development of the criteria that a parish with power of well-being should have. A number of tests have already been devised. They cover such matters as electoral mandate, qualifications of the clerk of the council, the frequency and administration of council meetings, communication, community and so on.

The hon. Gentleman made some probing comments about whether the Government are seeking to put a duty or obligation on every parish council to have to meet the criteria for power of well-being. We are not—that would be too onerous for certain parish councils, and many would not want it. We are not trying artificially to limit the number of parish councils that could have a power of well-being, but we want to ensure that the power is exercised sensibly and that the parish itself has the competence and ability to exercise the power. The number of parishes with quality parish status is fairly small—approximately 300. That might increase, but not because of a drive to get higher numbers. It will increase if councils want the power, and are sufficiently competent to be given it.

We have discussed matters with the National Association of Local Councils, and the association is broadly content with the Government’s position. When we consider the precise criteria, we shall talk to the association and to other stakeholders, including the LGA. In considering whether the power of well-being should go further than the quality parish scheme, we shall also explore whether, for example, the criteria should address potential financial implications.

We want to devolve power so that local people can have greater influence on services in their own local communities. We want councils to be able to respond better to local circumstances. However, appropriate safeguards have to be attached to devolution, both for the sake of the public and of councillors. By providing suitable appropriate criteria, we can find a way forward that is appropriate for all.

Alistair Burt (Shadow Minister (Communities and Local Government), Communities and Local Government; North East Bedfordshire, Conservative)

The Under-Secretary may not be able to answer now, but let me put an idea in her mind. Parish councils might come forward with a wish to take more powers, or powers that are outside the scope of the power of well-being—especially in relation to planning. They might say to the Government, “If you really want to devolve powers to us that will involve our local community, can we have more control over such and such an issue?”. Will the Government be open to that approach?

Angela Smith (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Communities and Local Government; Basildon, Labour)

Parish councils are statutory consultees of the higher-tier authority. If that authority wanted the parish council to take on such a role, it would have to ask it to do so, but the Government have no plans to take planning responsibilities away from the councils that currently have those responsibilities. The proposal we are making is different. It is about a power to engage the local community so that that community is at the heart of things. The power of well-being can do that. It is not about putting more onerous duties on parish councillors.

I am mindful of the hon. Gentleman’s comments. They are helpful. Nevertheless, I ask him to withdraw his amendment and to accept the Government’s proposal.

Alistair Burt (Shadow Minister (Communities and Local Government), Communities and Local Government; North East Bedfordshire, Conservative)

I am grateful for the spirit in which the Under-Secretary dealt with the amendment. I am pleased that we shall have more opportunity to explore the issue of parish councils in later sittings, because they are important and they provide a tremendously valuable backbone to local administration in our communities. It will be encouraging if we spend a bit more time on them at our next sitting. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.