Daniel Rogerson (North Cornwall, Liberal Democrat)

We have expressed suspicion about the Secretary of State having reserve powers, but clause 76 is the heart of the matter. In effect, it says, “If you don’t get on and do it, we will impose a strategy or a significant revision to a strategy.” I have concerns about that. Once again, I would like to hear the Minister’s clarification of the purpose of the clause and her explanation of the circumstances in which it might be used.

Rosie Winterton (Minister of State (Yorkshire and the Humber), Department for Communities and Local Government; Doncaster Central, Labour)

Clause 76 sets out the Secretary of State’s reserve power to revise a regional strategy, in whole or in part, where the responsible regional authority has failed to do so at the time specified in regulations or  directions. The clause also makes a saving provision for any steps already carried out in relation to a revision of an existing regional spatial or economic strategy at the time that the clause is commenced.

I know that the hon. Member for North Cornwall will probably not agree with what I am about to say, but we do not believe that the powers afforded to the Secretary of State are excessive. Indeed, the Secretary of State’s powers in this part of the Bill are broadly similar to those in the Regional Development Agencies Act 1998 and the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. The only wholly new powers are in relation to the leaders’ boards, but that is because the mechanism is a new one.

Daniel Rogerson (North Cornwall, Liberal Democrat)

Will the Minister explain subsection (6), which states:

“If the Secretary of State thinks it necessary or expedient to do so the Secretary of State may at any time revoke all or any part of a regional strategy”?

“Expedient” is an interesting word, and although it might be customary in such cases, it seems a little wide-ranging. To revoke all or any of a regional strategy is the nuclear option. We have a whole Bill about consultation and involving people, but this tiny little subsection effectively says that if the Secretary of State does not like it, we can rewrite the whole thing at a moment’s notice. That is a problem.

Rosie Winterton (Minister of State (Yorkshire and the Humber), Department for Communities and Local Government; Doncaster Central, Labour)

Again, I can assure the hon. Gentleman—I suspect that he will greet this with hollow laughter—that we intend that the Government will use reserve powers sparingly and as a last resort. I do mean that. Obviously the word “expedient” implies that there would be extremely good reasons for doing so. I must emphasise that the Government have taken enormous steps to devolve power to regional authorities. It is not the Government who, throughout the course of the Bill, have voted against the ability to draw up regional strategies and for there to be democratic accountability through the leaders’ board.

We want to see the strategies working effectively. There is no reason why they should not, because we believe that this is a good way to deliver economic prosperity and improve competitiveness in the regions. The principle here is that things have to be done at regional level. The circumstances in which the Secretary of State would wish to intervene in such a way would necessarily be as a last resort, and we believe it is important to have these powers as that last resort.

Peter Lilley (Hitchin & Harpenden, Conservative)

Will the Minister elaborate a little on a point that I think she made: the reserve powers here are similar to existing powers. As far as I can see, the reserve powers here allow the Minister to revise a regional strategy only if the relevant authority has not done so. I get the impression that, at present, the Secretary of State can revise a regional strategy, even if the regional body has itself revised it. Perhaps she will acquaint me with what the change in the Bill is, or what the existing legislation is.

I will give the Minister a case in point. The regional spatial strategy covering Milton Keynes to Luton was prepared, revising the existing strategy, and published.  Naturally it did not include Hertfordshire because that is not part of the area. The relevant councils then decided to revise it and to include among their preferred areas of development parts of north Hertfordshire that had not been in the existing area. Indeed, they held a meeting with the developers proposing to build in my area with Luton council. People from her Department were there, although I do not blame her because she was not in the Department at the time. This secret meeting was held without inviting North Hertfordshire district council, in whose area they were planning to build.

Is the Minister saying that the councils were acting outwith their powers? This clause would not give them such powers. Will there be an improvement on the present situation in such circumstances? Will the clause prevent the Secretary of State from getting into bed with local authorities that are re-revising their strategy after they have been through all the consultation?

Nick Raynsford (Greenwich & Woolwich, Labour)

Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

Peter Lilley (Hitchin & Harpenden, Conservative)

I give way to the defender of the indefensible.

Nick Raynsford (Greenwich & Woolwich, Labour)

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman. I simply refer him back to clause 75, which we approved a moment ago and provides for the circumstances about which he is concerned. Clause 76 simply makes provision for a failure by the responsible regional body to come forward with a regional strategy. In such circumstances, the Secretary of State has to act because of the failure of the regional body to produce a strategy.

There are circumstances at present in which the Secretary of State may make revisions to a strategic document prepared by a regional authority that is in some way defective. However, as I said, that is covered by clause 75. I hope that I am not defending the indefensible; I am simply pointing out that the right hon. Gentleman appears to have missed a clause.

Peter Lilley (Hitchin & Harpenden, Conservative)

The right hon. Gentleman is correct. I intended to catch the Chairman’s eye on the previous clause, but I am having to try to relate my remarks to this clause instead. His point is well made and well taken, and I withdraw my epithet. None the less, a question still arises: does the clause significantly change the Secretary of State’s powers to intervene in the kind of circumstances that I described?

Rosie Winterton (Minister of State (Yorkshire and the Humber), Department for Communities and Local Government; Doncaster Central, Labour)

Let me set out the range of the powers in the clause. There are powers that enable the Secretary of State to give a steer to the regional authority through guidance and regulations, powers that relate to the Secretary of State’s role and responsibilities at specific stages of the strategy-making process, and reserve powers as a fall-back. As I said earlier, there are existing reserve powers in respect of the preparation of regional spatial strategies. The Secretary of State has not had to resort to them, so obviously did not on the occasion that the right hon. Member for Hitchin and Harpenden mentioned. These wholly new powers apply to the leaders’ board, which is a newly constituted organisation.

Obviously, it is difficult for me to comment on the case to which the right hon. Gentleman refers. If he wants to write to me about the circumstances, I am  more than happy to have a look at it. However, as I said, the existing powers are in section 10 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

I do not think that the powers set out in this clause would be used excessively because, as I tried to explain, that is not what we want. We want regional strategies to be drawn up, but we need a reserve power in case it is necessary to attend to exceptional circumstances.