Clause 54

Localism Bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 8:00 pm on 8 February 2011.

Alert me about debates like this

Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

Photo of Alison Seabeck Alison Seabeck Shadow Minister (Communities and Local Government)

I have a query, which can best be illustrated by using an example from Plymouth. The council executive decided to site an incinerator in Plymouth on the basis of a decision made by the South West Devon waste partnership. What would happen if local people subsequently applied for a referendum? As I understand it, the resolution to allow that referendum must be taken by the full council rather than the executive who made the original decision, which is slightly odd. If the referendum takes place at the same time as the planning application, which the executive has authorised, how does that work? Surely the planning application would have to be delayed. It is a strange way for a council to do business.

Photo of Nick Raynsford Nick Raynsford Labour, Greenwich and Woolwich

My hon. Friend has made an interesting point about the potential interface between a planning application and a referendum, and the fact that different levels of decision making in the local authority would have to apply in those cases.

Will the Minister explain the logic behind this rather curious little clause? It appears to require any decisions regarding the referendum duties to be made by the whole council, not by the executive. In the case of the Greater London authority, decisions would be made  not by the Mayor but jointly by the Mayor and the Greater London assembly. I would welcome confirmation that I have understood the clause correctly.

I can understand why a decision on a substantive resolution on one of the points of principle—how, for example, the council decides to respond to a petition—should be taken by the whole council. This chapter, however, contains a whole series of duties. In clause 43, the first duty is to decide whether a referendum is appropriate. In clause 43(4), another decision must be made over whether it is appropriate to refer the matter to another authority. Under clause 44, if the local authority does not intend to hold a referendum it must set out its grounds for not doing so. Clause 46 contains the administrative arrangements for holding the referendum. Clause 48 concerns the decision on the question to be asked in the referendum, and clause 52 deals with the decision about what the local authority will do as a consequence of the outcome of the referendum.

I can understand the latter decision, and possibly the decision on the question itself, being matters for the council, but is it really necessary for the whole council to make a decision on referring the matter from a district council to another tier of Government? That obligation appears to be imposed by the clause as it stands. If it is not, I would welcome clarification. Similarly, the arrangements in clause 46 for holding a referendum are purely administrative, and surely they do not require a resolution of the whole council. In the case of the simple matter of a specific arrangement for a referendum, that could be delegated.

Photo of Henry Smith Henry Smith Conservative, Crawley 8:15, 8 February 2011

Before our break this afternoon, Opposition Members said a lot about how referendums as proposed were too easy to hold, or could be called on trivial matters. Now there seems to be an inconsistency, as the right hon. Member for Greenwich and Woolwich says the matter would need to go to the full council. It would have thought that he would welcome the provision.

Photo of Nick Raynsford Nick Raynsford Labour, Greenwich and Woolwich

Perhaps I have not been explaining myself properly. My concern is that the provisions appear to require all decisions taken by the authority under the clauses to be decided by full council. I argue the devolutionist case. Surely it should be left to the authority to decide the appropriate way to handle things, except perhaps with respect to the fundamental outcome—what the authority will do as a result of the referendum—or at an earlier stage if it decides not to hold a referendum; I can understand that it might be regarded as appropriate for that question to go to the whole council, so that the decision is seen to be made by the whole council and not just a part of it.

I was arguing, in devolutionist mode, that administrative decisions on the nuts and bolts of holding a referendum should not require a resolution of the whole council. They should be left to the appropriate part of the council—officers or whoever—who would, under normal arrangements under the authority’s procedure for delegation, handle those matters. I may have got things wrong and misinterpreted the clause, but it appears to do as I have described. It states that

“passing a resolution under any provision of this Chapter” is exempt from section 101 of the Local Government Act 1972, which allows the delegation of responsibilities in certain cases. It goes on to state:

“In the case of a principal local authority that is operating executive arrangements, a function of passing a resolution under this Chapter is not to be the responsibility of the authority’s executive”.

That seems to imply that any decision taken under the chapter, including some quite routine and mundane administrative ones, must be taken by the full council, rather than being subject to the normal scheme of delegation. I hope that I am wrong, but if I am not, will the Minister consider the provision again? It appears to me that it is not in the spirit of devolution.

Photo of Andrew Stunell Andrew Stunell The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Communities and Local Government

I am happy to assure the right hon. Gentleman that he is wrong. He wanted that assurance; usually when I give it to him he does not welcome it. On this occasion I direct him to the phraseology of clause 54(1). The function that is reserved is that of passing a resolution, so that is what must be done by the full council.

I would say that in the nature of these things, those with local authority service who find their way into this House have commonly spent much of that service in a majority group. I am one of those Members of Parliament who found his way here but who was not in a majority group, and I think it is right that there should be safeguards for minority groups on councils. One of those safeguards is transparency in decision making on such issues. Specifically, a single-party executive, which is of course the norm on majority-controlled authorities, would not provide the level of openness and transparency that would be given by the capacity to debate and pass a resolution in a full council of all members, of all persuasions, elected to that authority. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will take in good part the fact that those of us who have trodden the narrow and harder road of opposition and minority participation believe that the provision comes to us in the right form.

Photo of Nick Raynsford Nick Raynsford Labour, Greenwich and Woolwich

Can the Minister satisfy me on a worry? Clause 43 sets out what must be decided by the authority when it receives requests for a referendum—either a petition or a request from a councillor:

“The principal local authority must determine whether it is appropriate to hold a local referendum”.

The clause goes on to say that if the council decides that the matter relates to another authority, it should refer it to that authority. The phrase “must determine” implies a resolution of the council. Can there be a determination without a formal resolution of the council? If so, surely the provisions in the wording to which I have drawn attention will bite, as it is stated that any

“function of passing a resolution under any provision of this chapter” is outside the normal scheme of delegation.

Photo of Andrew Stunell Andrew Stunell The Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Communities and Local Government

I will take a deep breath on that one and perhaps return to it on another occasion, and will write to the right hon. Gentleman if necessary.

The clause relates to the passing of the resolution that is related specifically to the referendum. From my perspective—the right hon. Gentleman will not be surprised to hear me say this—if all these matters were taken in the council, I would not see it as a bad thing, but that  depends on one’s philosophical view about the efficacy and democracy of having a council executive. I would like to reassure him that in that respect the Bill is on his side, not mine, as the words “must determine” are used in clause 43, as he quite rightly says, so a resolution is not required. The determination, for instance, could be delegated to officers. I trust that the outcome of the discussion, if not entirely to my satisfaction, is entirely to his.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 54accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 55 ordered to stand part of the Bill.