I thank the hon. Gentleman for what he has said. I am sorry if I have given any such impression, for it would be entirely counter to my interests and instincts. I know that what is distinctive about the Bill is the cross-party consensus behind it. The hon. Gentleman’s point about a long-term trend is well founded: we are talking about a trend that goes back over 20 or 25 years and spans various Governments.
Let me return to why the Bill is essential. Its premise is that there is no coherent strategy at present, and that one is required. There have been plenty of initiatives, as I said earlier, but the whole approach has been undermined by a key failing, which has been identified by Professor Anne Hill of the London School of Economics in a document published by the Government’s own Sustainable Development Commission. She wrote of the Deputy Prime Minister’s sustainable communities five-year plan"““It is essentially a top down programme which does little to encourage community involvement or ownership of the proposals… and does not propose tools for delivery to ensure long term community viability and environmental protection””."
The Bill is required because existing laws and mechanisms are not adequate.
It is not clear that either the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill, which we will debate on Monday, or the Lyons review will give the issue of community decline enough prominence. The Lyons report will focus primarily on the financing of local government, while the Bill is essentially about its governance—although, as the Minister will undoubtedly tell us, bits of it take us further down the path of devolving power and improving local accountability.
My Bill does not contradict Government legislation; it complements the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill by giving prominence to the issue of sustainable communities. It will give real teeth to local area agreements, and will push the Government further in the direction of devolution in which they need to travel in order to make a real difference.
The Bill specifies four necessary steps. First, it requires central Government to give more priority to the promotion of sustainable communities, and makes them accountable for delivering a long-term action plan in support of that aim. It requires them to draw up that plan in a different, bottom-up way, with the real participation of communities and residents acting through their local authorities. Secondly, it will give local authorities the right to demand and receive a breakdown of central Government spending on local services in their areas. I emphasise the distinction between the money that is already passed to local government and the money spent by central Government directly through Departments and through their network of agencies and quangos in the communities that we represent.
Sustainable Communities Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Nick Hurd
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Friday, 19 January 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Sustainable Communities Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
455 c1043-4 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:14:02 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_371020
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_371020
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_371020