My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Ironically—although perhaps it is not so surprising—we are having a topsy turvy debate. The hon. Member for North-East Bedfordshire claims that his proposals would benefit devolution, even though they do not. To be fair to the hon. Member for Hazel Grove, his proposals do promote devolution, although I think that they go too far. However, we should not be surprised at all that: the Conservatives are centralists, while the Liberal Democrats are devolutionists without responsibility. I guess that explains where we have ended up. I must try to rebuild the consensus that I have been crafting so carefully for the past two years and which I may have destroyed in the last 10 seconds. This debate has revealed the divergence of view between the Liberal Democrats and the main Opposition party, whose proposed new clauses would reduce the range of choice that the Government are offering.
Neither I nor the Government claim, as the hon. Member for North-East Bedfordshire suggested, that councils are ““clamouring”” after the elected executive model. I readily concede that they are not.
Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Phil Woolas
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 22 May 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
460 c1202 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:18:14 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398896
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398896
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398896