UK Parliament / Open data

Cheshire (Structural Changes) Order 2008

My Lords, I apologise, but in mitigation, I hope that the point that I made right at the beginning will be understood: that we have simply not had the opportunity to put our point of view. Despite other Members of this House having applied repeatedly to the Chancellor, the Secretary of State for Education and others, we have not been entertained or given a chance to speak up. I apologise to others and I will try to bring my report to a close, but I hope that the House will understand that there is that strong feeling. Let me just mention some other areas. If we are to conclude as we are, we will have difficulties with education and children's services. We will have to disaggregate current functions such as highways, libraries, waste, trading standards and tourism. There is even the problem at Tatton Park that is, increasing bureaucracy and costs. Let me conclude with some mention of strategic leadership. When I was concerned with Cheshire County Council in the north-west, it was imperative that Cheshire County Council spoke with one voice. Otherwise, we in the north-west lost the gravitational power of Liverpool, of Manchester and of Lancashire. As the noble Lord, Lord Wade of Chorlton, mentioned the report from Salford University, which routs the proposition that somehow Cheshire in the west and Cheshire in the east gravitate towards Liverpool and Manchester, whereas in fact they have a unique, strong and thriving economy within themselves, I will not repeat that. In conclusion, in my amendment I have sought to add to the amendment moved by the noble Lord, Lord Wade of Chorlton, that it ought to be discussed here as well as taking the views of the people of Cheshire. I am prepared to withdraw my amendment, and I remind my noble friend that this is not a fatal amendment, but it is an amendment from the heart of the people of Cheshire, who do not want their county disaggregated, but who want more time than the 20 minutes accorded tonight to say, ““Think again””, even if it is only to think again about how we produce two unitary authorities. That opportunity should be taken; it should be taken tonight. I beg to move. Moved, as an amendment to the amendment in the name of Lord Wade of Chorlton, at end to insert ““and Parliament has had the opportunity to debate their opinions.””—(Lord Harrison.)

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

699 c1044 

Session

2007-08

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top