Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

I was interested to note the noble Baroness’s choice of heading for the proposed new clause: ““Exemption of London””. It exemplifies her view that parish councils would be some sort of evil imposition from which London should be spared. She will not be surprised to learn that we do not agree with her. My honourable friend in another place, the Member for Hazel Grove, in response to another speech, said: "““The hon. Gentleman is right in one regard: parish councils can be an irritant in the system””.—[Official Report, Commons, Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Committee, 22/2/07; col. 332.]" Grit in oysters and all that, but irritants in the system are not necessarily a bad thing by any means. A number of borough councils in London have neighbourhood and area structures, and to allow for parishes would not be a vote of no confidence in those bodies. In fact, this is not anything more than a matter of choice. I cannot count the number of times that my colleagues and I have campaigned on the ““forgotten end”” of the borough on the basis that the borough in which we were campaigning was a good deal bigger than its previous constituent parts. I should say that this was when we were in opposition. That struck a chord, and it is an important point. Let us keep the provision of choice, which is a theme of our debates. I do not seek exemption for London. The capital should have the benefit of a system which is available throughout the rest of the country.