Clause 69
Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [Lords]
4:45 pm
Julia Goldsworthy (Falmouth and Camborne, Liberal Democrat)
I rise to make a few brief comments. We discussed on the previous clause the extent to which leaders’ boards and the indirectly elected representatives who, it now seems, will sit on them give a gloss of legitimacy to the work that the RDAs undertake. The clause reveals who actually is in charge. Although on earlier clauses we asked, “Is this really necessary?” the key question in the next few clauses is, “Who is in charge of the process?” The clause makes it clear that the RDA is the first among equals in the partnership between it and the leaders’ board because, if I understand the clause correctly, the leaders’ board can be suspended and, if that happens, the RDA stays in charge.
Our earlier amendments tried to firmly establish that even though the leaders’ boards were indirectly elected—we wanted to find ways to make them more directly and democratically representative and accountable—the responsible regional authority had some kind of democratic legitimacy and would not be overpowered by the RDA. Our main concern about the clause is that it will still give a huge amount of power to the RDA and undermine a clear chain of accountability.