Clause 30
Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [Lords]
1:30 pm
Paul Goodman (Shadow Minister, Communities and Local Government; Wycombe, Conservative)
Our approach to clause 30 is, in a manner of speaking, the opposite of our approach to clauses 28 and 29, which we have just considered. When we originally looked at clauses 28 and 29, we were inclined to be sceptical and looked at what happened in the Lords, but we came to the conclusion that they should pass muster. We have not tabled one of our repetitious and unselectable amendments in an attempt to delete clause 30, because we want to give the Minister a chance to justify it. Having said that, it did not have a friendly reception in the other place, where both Lord Hanningfield and Baroness Hanwee were extremely sceptical about it, drawing attention to the difference between the present state of affairs, where there is a monitoring officer, and a section 151 officer, and trying to get the Minister in the Lords to explain where that post would slot into the present arrangements. Indeed, Baroness Hanwee spoke of her opposition to the clause.
At the risk of sounding like a broken gramophone record, we come back again and again to the same question: bang in the middle of part 1 is the word “must”. Must we have “must” in the Bill? Need the statute book have such specific obligations placed on local authorities? The Minister probably has some explanation up her sleeve for why the finance officer, referred to in subsection 4(c), and the monitoring officer and the head of the authority’s paid service, referred to in paragraphs (b) and (a) respectively, may not be designated and why other posts may be, and I look forward to hearing it.
In summary, obviously the role of scrutinising what takes place in local councils is extremely important. We on the official Opposition Benches say that the correct balance must be struck between proper scrutiny and the need not to overburden local authorities with so many scrutinising duties from the centre that it makes it difficult for them to run their affairs with flexibility. We wait to hear what the Minster has to say, but we are far from convinced that the clause, as drafted, should stand part of the Bill.