That is a fair point, although I do not intend to get side-tracked on parliamentary procedure. My argument is that there are fundamental weaknesses in the Bill. It is incumbent upon us to be aware of them, and I believe they are sufficiently profound for us not to give the Bill a Second Reading.
At the end of the bureaucratic process set out in the Bill, the Secretary of State must implement an approved local spending plan to which all Government Departments and agencies must adhere. If they do not allocate funds on that basis, the Secretary of State has the power to direct them to do so. That is not only excessively bureaucratic, but a recipe for creating conflict within Government. Yes, we are all in favour of dovetailing and ensuring that Government Departments work coherently together, but it is another matter entirely for one Department to have such control over the strategic priorities of other Departments without a fundamental review of how government is organised in this country. The Bill does not even begin to take us in that direction.
Sustainable Communities Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Wayne David
(Labour)
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 c1068 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:13:58 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_371102
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_371102
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_371102