I share the hon. Gentleman’s objective—and that of the Government—of giving greater discretion and autonomy to local government. That is clearly a desirable objective and I am pleased that we are moving down that route. However, I can see a problem with his new clause. He has stressed that it is inappropriate to set national targets and expect them to apply across the country because different circumstances will apply in different locations. Does he accept that, as part of a proportionate system of regulation, in some areas it might be appropriate to have rather more in the way of regulatory requirements and indicators of performance? I was conscious of that when I was responsible for improvements in local authorities. In certain areas, which we were doing badly, there was clearly a need for more focus in order to get an improvement. If he agrees with what I have said, how is that compatible with a system that simply seeks to reduce the total number of targets across the country, regardless of local variations?
Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Nick Raynsford
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 17 May 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
460 c780 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:31:13 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_397669
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_397669
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_397669