Clause 86
Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill [Lords]
9:00 am
Dan Rogerson (North Cornwall, Liberal Democrat)
It is a pleasure to see you back in the Chair, Mr. Amess. As the hon. Member for Wycombe said, we are effectively discussing the principles behind EPBs and how they will interact with the other arrangements. I agree entirely that although those of us on this side of the Committee have sought to use Divisions to indicate in detail our disapproval of certain aspects of the Bill, a key principle is at stake here. Is the case being made successfully for EPBs alongside the other arrangements we have discussed? I have explained that my party would prefer regions that make more sense to people, which might make EPBs unnecessary. Groups of local authorities coming together to form regions with RDAs that match those boundaries would be a better process, although as the Minister kindly pointed out, that would take some time.
With that in mind, we tabled a series of amendments, which of course were unselectable, calling for Divisions on individual clauses. Whether EPBs will make a useful contribution and whether they will cut across the work of regional bodies remains to be seen, but we look forward to hearing more from the Minister about that as we move through this part of the Bill.
The hon. Member for Wycombe discussed subsection (4)(f). I must confess that I had not picked up on that point, and I am glad that he raised it as it is a serious one that deals with an established practice that is a strength of local government. Of course, my party would like a slightly different electoral system, such as the one that they now have in Scotland, to allow local authorities to reflect the popular vote even more closely. However, even with our present system, it is important that all political groups and all views have the option to be represented in bodies formed. I have concerns about leaders’ boards from that point of view also. We must be careful in considering the EPBs.