Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

I am disappointed by that. It is horses for courses. What will work well in one area might be quite different from another area. It is okay to say that it would be ridiculous in Birmingham. I accept that there should perhaps be a maximum size; perhaps it should be ““a quarter but not more than 15””, or something like that. That would be quite reasonable. There are councils whose executives are very small, operating with a tightly knit group of people with enormous, inordinate and unnecessary power. Those councils must have different arrangements from the rest of the councils if not just the scrutiny but the involvement of people in making decisions are to work. It is no good saying to councillors, ““You can champion this or scrutinise that””. Councillors need to be involved in making decisions. Good councillors will always have ways to do that, such as through pre-decision scrutiny or through working groups working to executive members, a model which works in some places. Some councils have got around the legislation by effectively having advisory committees to executive members, who take the decisions but do what the committee wants. All sorts of models exist; the Government need to realise that local government is very diverse. Every council is different, with a different culture. Even councils that from the outside appear to be operating the same models are different. I sit on an executive of 10 and ask myself what the difference is between that and a committee. I do not know; it operates as a committee. You can have an executive of six to 10 people that meets to discuss agenda items—it does not rubber-stamp them—where the public and councillors who are not on the executive can take part, making points on behalf of their ward, town or other interests. Is that a committee? Is it an executive? Is it a bird? Who knows? The Government are making unnecessary, tight, rigid distinctions which do not exist in the real world. There are people at the extremes, perhaps operating very well, and everybody else in the middle with their own way of coping with the system. I am disappointed by the Minister’s response but, for the moment, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendments Nos. 119 to 121 not moved.] Clause 62 agreed to. [Amendment No. 121A not moved.] Clause 63 [Discharge of functions]: [Amendments Nos. 122 and 123 not moved.]