Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill

It might help the Committee and perhaps speed progress if I speak now to the question on whether Clause 130 should stand part—or at least I shall speak now to the amendments of the noble Lord, Lord Hanningfield, and say what I was going to say on clause stand part at the same time. Then I will not have to say anything at all when we reach that stage. I tabled the question on clause stand part precisely to probe the kind of thing that the noble Lord was probing in his first amendment. When I read it, I did not understand its purpose, but now I do and that is fine. There was an interesting discussion of this subject and of how wide the by-law-making power might be in the Public Bill Committee of this House. Some Members of Parliament had thought that it was restricted to by-laws which are normally under the control of the Secretary of State in the Department for Communities and Local Government. My honourable friend Tom Brake put down an amendment that listed about 18 different areas of by-laws that he wanted to put on the face of the Bill in order to ensure that they were included in this section. It included things like the Commons Act and the Dartmoor Commons Act and Hackney carriages and omnibuses and all kinds of things. The then Minister, Phil Woolas, admitted that it was not clear what the Bill meant, but said that in the Government’s view it was quite clear that: "““If Parliament gives the go-ahead, we intend to use the powers to introduce the new procedures first in relation to byelaws that are confirmed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government””." Then he said: "““In future, other Secretaries of State with responsibility for confirming byelaws may decide, following consultation—that is not a caveat ‘may’, but a permissive power””—" which, on the basis of what my noble friend Lady Hamwee said earlier, he was suggesting meant ““will””— "““that it would be appropriate to make use of the powers””." He also cited some examples such as, "““byelaws to deal with countryside recreation in national open spaces, such as national parks and areas of outstanding natural beauty””.—[Official Report, Commons, Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill Committee, 27/2/07; cols. 389-90.]" There was quite a discussion in the Committee about Lake Windermere and other matters that I did not understand at all. But the general gist of Mr Woolas’s comments was clearly that, once the Bill is passed, there will be a steady roll-out of by-law-making powers across Whitehall departments. They are all happy about that and only too anxious to get on with it. By-law-making powers regarding libraries and museums were mentioned as well as the fact that those would be handed down once the Bill is passed, which we suggest should happen fairly quickly. Is a clear list of the by-law-making powers that the Government will hand down to local authorities under this part of the Bill available, and if so, is there a timetable and a programme of which departments will hand them down first, second, third and so on, and how that will work? Are the commitments that Phil Woolas gave in the Commons genuine commitments that can be proved to be genuine, preferably before Report stage, or do we have to go back to the kind of amendment moved by Tom Brake in the House of Commons to stick more by-laws in the Bill? Those are my questions on this group of amendments.