I beg to move, That the Bill be now read the Third time.
I start by reassuring the House that the significant number of Government amendments that have just been passed came about not as a result of sloppy workmanship on our part, but because of the desirability of accommodating many points made on both sides in Committee. Secondly, I would like to thank Members for their contribution to the scrutiny and improvement of the Bill both in Committee and on the Floor of the House.
It is worth reminding the House that this was the first Bill to pass through the evidence-taking process and I should like to put on record—I am sure that I speak on behalf of the whole Committee—our thanks to the witnesses who provided both written and oral evidence. It turned out to be very helpful in informing the Committee’s deliberations and was often referred to in debate. As I said, changes to the Bill have largely been the result of the good work done in Committee. I hope that we can move forward in that spirit.
I should also like to thank the Under-Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, my hon. Friend the Member for Basildon (Angela E. Smith), for her work on the Bill and for her support, which has been invaluable. I have learned a lot about Essex, particularly about women from Essex—but I shall go no further on that point. Suffice it to say that champagne moments have a different meaning in different parts of the country—[Interruption.] I thank the hon. Member for Bromley and Chislehurst (Robert Neill): at least someone is keeping up and has a good sense of humour. Perhaps he and I have a peculiar sense of humour, but I shall move on swiftly.
As my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State said on Second Reading:"““The Bill implements the majority of the proposals set out in ‘Strong and prosperous communities’, the local government White Paper, which was published in October.””—[Official Report, 22 January 2007; Vol. 455, c. 1144.]"
That White Paper was the result of exhaustive consultation, which was started by my right hon. Friend the Member for Greenwich and Woolwich (Mr. Raynsford) and his team back in 2004, and then taken forward in informing the report of Sir Michael Lyons as well as our debates on the Bill.
We believe that the Bill is radical and devolutionary, setting out a new statutory framework for local councils and a new relationship between central and local government—not just between my Department and councils, but between Whitehall and councils. It sets out a new relationship between local government and its partner organisations at the local level, many of which are local agents of Government Departments.
Crucially, the Bill sets out a new relationship between local government and its partners and the people who live in the relevant local area. It allows local authorities and their partners to work together in delivering the full range of local services in an area. As such, it represents a new, modern take on public service reform. It joins up government at the local level, which is where the citizen requires it to be joined up. It takes forward key themes of joining up local services and giving local authorities greater freedom to develop their own solutions. I believe that this is the most devolutionary local government reform Bill for many years.
Also crucially, the Bill is not just about local government reform. It places two new measures on the statute book. The first is the duty on local government agencies and public sector organisations to co-operate in reaching local area agreement targets with the council. The second, achieved through clause 108, is an insistence on devolution—or what has been described as double devolution—in respect of the duty to inform, to involve and to consult. In my view, those two statutory measures change the structure and, even more importantly, the climate of local government, which has been welcomed. I also believe that that is why the Bill has, on the whole, commanded support across the political parties in the Local Government Association.
The Bill says to local councils, ““Don’t ask Whitehall’s permission to get on and do things. Get on and do it, unless Parliament and the Government say otherwise.”” That will require a culture change in the leadership and management of local authorities, as well as structural and financial changes. I could point to a number of devolutionary measures in the Bill that we have debated. Of course, these measures need to be considered in the context of the debate on the Sustainable Communities Bill that is taking place in time provided for private Members’ Bills, and in the context of the planning White Paper that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government announced yesterday.
This Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill introduces reforms on the scrutiny of policy and the delivery of health services. Crucially, it is a Bill about the involvement of local government in health. It reverses the trend of 50 to 60 years of health services and local government moving away from each other, and brings them closer together. That is what the patient, the resident, the citizen—call them what you will—requires. The public do not differentiate between structures and organisations; they want services that deliver. There is strong evidence that the Bill is radical, devolutionary and pro-local government, and that it puts trust in local government and requires central Government to change their attitude. It is important to emphasise that the new performance regime for local authorities that will replace the comprehensive performance assessment will involve a regime of targets that are set locally. Different targets will be applied in different areas to reflect the realities of the differences in geography, economics and culture in those areas.
I look forward to the deliberations on the Bill in the other place, and to taking forward these measures and the other proposals in the White Paper to change the balance of power in this country from the centre to local areas in a way that I believe is irreversible.
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 c1236-8 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:18:22 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398920
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398920
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_398920